#but the original show is so complex and those complexities are personally important to me

[fitzrove]

jfkfkdkddk i just realised it's gonna take me a couple months to release my video essay so maybe i'll just blurt out some of my tanz der vampire hot takes now

- ALFRED IS THE MAIN CHARACTER come on you guys,,, you can like and be interested in other characters but it's a problem when the show itself doesn't remember how it was written. The very structure of the show (music, dialogue, plot, scenes) rebels against trying to change this and productions that push him aside just end up jumbled and messy. It's literally a main reason Kunze hated Broadway Tanz

- tied to this, so many people view carpe noctem as this "haha weird random nightmare dance number, guess it was added to pad the runtime" like no... that is literally a way for the show to metaphorically recap and further develop the central themes of the show to the audience at the beginning of act 2... open your eyes...

- I'll take Kunze's "tdv is a musical symbolizing the fall of the berlin wall" (true take of his) over "a longterm relationship with krolock is the ultimate way for sarah to liberate herself" any day. 😭

[bonestrouslingbones]

btw one of the things i want to do when i really rap up atbb for real is spontaneously get the energy at will to do actual updated fullbodies of the main 4 since now i actually have the ability to draw them the way they look in my head & have the skills to put some more variety in their shapes. basically i wanna

[buried-l0cket]

Polygun but it’s how they all see each other

i always really like in books with different narrators when how a character looks itself is unreliable narration bc they describe themself differently compared to how the other pov characters see them, and the dungeon meshi shapeshifter chart scratched that itch for me art wise and I got inspired ✨

To be more specific this is what they each picture when they think of each person 👉👈

Details under cut!!

Meryl clothing details aside because I think she’s just short and the boys aren’t looking at her traveling clothes too hard (and vash clearly likes making his own clothes with how much his overly intricate jacket design changes so ofc his version of her outfit just looks like another one of his designs 🙄) all of the clothes are based on specific parts of the manga!

A big thing with these designs was taking moments that were important regarding each characters relationship with the pov character and adding in visual nods to that to show what memories stuck with them to shape their image of that person.

The clearest example of this is everyone thinking of a different Vash coat, for Wolfwood it’s what he was wearing when he turned him over to Knives, to Meryl it’s his final fight coat, and for Milly it’s when she met him.

It may be Trimax but I will always have a soft spot for 98 millywood so those two’s impression of each other has been influenced by that, but more specifically just the idea of them both alone together, layers and walls down, hair messy from sleep. Their relationship is one I just see very clearly developing over a lot of late nights at inns and bars during traveling!

Vash is the trademarked inventor of Savior Martyr Victim complex supreme and when he thinks of everyone he sees times they’ve been let down by him. To me he’s the biggest broken gear in their dynamic because of the way he holds himself back and isolates, the ship really works in spite of him most of the time. But he also sees traces of times his desire to be by their side was cemented. His Meryl is heavily based on after she was kidnapped by the GHGs and he lost control in front of her, but her hair is longer + earrings are gone like when they saw each other again after Knives released the ark, and she has a black turtleneck peaking out from under her traveling clothes the way it did under her space suit during the final battle. His Milly has the hair and undershirt of the final battle but her outer clothes are from when they traveled together for the majority of Trimax. His wolfwood isn’t doing too well.

Meryl’s versions of Milly and Wolfwood are both pretty similar to how they looked when she first met them, wolfwoods hair is just a little longer like I imagine it being towards the end of Trimax and is very windswept, from their short first meeting in the original Trigun manga run I always got the impression she thought he looked very cool lol, she was staring up at him like ://0 the whole chapter.

I mentioned it before but honestly most of Wolfwood’s Vash is based on how he looked when he turned him over to Knives, not only do I think that moment stuck with him but I feel like it’s a good visual summary of all the mixed feelings he has towards Vash. He’s drawn to him and sees how sad he his but he also sees how inhuman he is and the threat he and knives pose for the people he cares about and prioritizes. At the end of the day Wolfwood chose the orphans over Vash twice and never went back on that, and a big part of why he broke Vash our of Knives prison was just so he could go fight Knives to the death for humanity’s sake, and I think that’s important to his character and their relationship.

Similarly, Meryl’s Vash is really just final arc Vash. She’d already developed a very strong impression of him before then but they would go weeks to even years without seeing each other and each time the way he looked and the way she felt about him would change drastically, it seemed to me like it wasn’t till she was on the ship advocating for him and the people living on gunsmoke that she knew how she felt about him and what kind of person she saw him to be. It was also a huge moment for her character wise with the way she faced her fears in the name of human connection and made the active choice to not be as apathetic and closed off as she realized she had been in the early manga.

I think Milly’s first impression of Vash was strong and accurate enough to not change much, this nice guy is Vash the Stampede and there is definitely something weird about him.

I don’t know why Wolfwood doesn’t know what Meryl’s hair looks like, what’s wrong with that guy? In general his version of Meryl is very inaccurate now that I’m looking at it, I promise he likes her

+small details that are my personal headcanon and not the characters interpretations are Meryl and Wolfwoods hair being a bit more curly/textured than canon, Milly’s eyes being green, and Meryl’s earrings being silver (gold earrings with a white black and blue outfit and silver guns?? C’mon girl accessorize properly)

[absolutelymarshmallow]

This is my favourite scene in the show

I never noticed how complex Crowley’s outfit is in this scene. There’s red embroidery, a black sash. The rob itself is supposed to be rough, heavy, grey.

However, in the first scene in the show, Aziraphale’s robes are light, white, cotton, gold embroidered, and two-pieced. A poncho, and a skirt. His outfit is supposed to look generic, like an angel uniform. Heaven adopted this odd, manufactured, cold neatness after the fall. 

Crowley’s outfit after the fall is more like a dress. It’s being held together by the black sash. It also looks more fitted to his body, and this makes me suspect that he made this himself. The Color scheme is also fitting to his hair.

Crowley had always been naturally dramatic, everyone knows that. However, I think this is his first minor ‘fuck you’ to hell. The heaven Color scheme is grey, white, tan, gold, and primarily purple. However, before, it was primarily gold and white. Aziraphale has ways opted for golds and whites as well, but he also has a love for browns and blues. This is how you know it’s a heaven uniform.

Hell’s color scheme in the beginning is yet to be observed but it’s probably not grey, black, and red. Those are all Crowley’s colors.

He’s been separating himself from hell since the very beginning. I say *first* ‘fuck-you’ because he had been wearing these robes before he gave humans the apple: an accidental good deed, the original good-natured rebellion.

Aziraphale has been accidentally doing ‘bad’ (or minorly negative) things since the beginning as well. He got caught up trying to save an angel, he gave away a sword, and most importantly he the concept invented war and weaponry in the human history.

I think this scene’s importance gets lost on a lot of people.

Aziraphale shielding Crowley is also very, very important, no matter how adorable. He, at this point, remembers Crowley. He looks guilty, nervous even, when he sees him slither up to him. Not just because he’s a snake, but you can see there’s something small and personal that he’s trying his best to hide. I think he knows.

Then, he learns his name for the first time, it just happens to be his demonic one. He never mentions his angel name, *never*, because he doesn’t know it. But more importantly, he doesn’t want to offend Crowley.

And yet they have a meaningful conversation, which is !also! very important. The first time he meets him as an angel,  Aziraphale looks like he’s flustered and smitten. He fell first, literally and figuratively. However,  Crowley isn’t at all interested in making conversation with this angel. He’s just excitedly talking about stars. Which, I admit, is adorable, but it wasn’t in any way of meaning other than that’s when they met.

Aziraphale realises how this *new* first, important conversation is utterly vital, in their relationship. Crowley is interested in Aziraphale, and he *does not remember him* at *all*. To Crowley, he’s lost all his memories now, which he regains later over a few millennia. I suspect, he’s regained all his memories by the book of Job, which is why he acts how he does.

Crowley falls in love immediately. Angels, fallen or otherwise, have shown him nothing but disrespect since he fell. And here’s this Angel trying to help him. Aziraphale indeed has guilt, but seeing someone he knew like this, wiped clean and ‘disfigured’ (or, beautiful), makes him realise what the fall actually *was*.

Just think.

An innocent star maker. And now he sees Crowley, the *real* Crowley. He’s witty, and fun, and outward. He’s making conversation, he’s comforting, he’s sarcastic.

He’s a real being.

And how neat.

So, he holds on. He shields him. Like he was shielded before, equally innocent and new to the universe, as Crowley’s now new to earth.

He sees himself.

Aziraphale is a lot more mature with how he treats Crowley in the beginning than people realise, but he loses that later once they start forming their own side, also in the book of Job.

Emotions are complicated. I know I’ve been talking for a long time, but I think it’s neat is all.

[toulouse21]

Spoiler of heartstopper: season 3, ep 8

I loved the new season, ok, I really did. All of it is so extremely important and meaningful, I love it, BUT-

I can't put in words how much I got upset because tori's asexuality was not approached.

This scene on the show wasn't totally like it was in the book, and I know movie adaptations from books (even if it's a graphic novel) are never the same as the original product, but her speech in THIS scene it's so important to her characther, I really thought they would include it all in this ep. But they didn't.

Don't get me wrong, the scene is still good. It's amazing that heartstopper portray how Charlie's ed affected him AND everyone around him, everybody who loves him. It's extremely important that Charlie says that to Tori, she can't spend all her time worrying about him, that's an amazing lesson and Im really glad he said that.

But I still think they lost a giant opportunity of exploring even more the complexity of Tori's characther only by including this tiny speech of her.

And now talking about the representation. Im about 90% sure Im a teenager asexual, and let me tell you, I can't describe how much happy I got when Tori said those words on the paper. It was the first time I didn't feel alone.

Currently, LGBT representation on media is becoming more and more common (THANK FUCKING GOD, WE FOUGHT SO MUCH FOR THIS) AND IT'S AMAZING, but there are a lot of people who still are kind ignored by stories in general.

I can name some canon aro/ace characthers in current shows and books, but the only asexual characthers who feel romantic attraction I can name are Tori and Aled (Aled is tecnically in the asexual umbrella), and that's it.

Also, the fear Tori feels about dating Michael is so extremely realistic, you guys can't even imagine. She really likes Michael (romantically and as a friend too), she doesn't like to admit it but she knows it, apparently she wants to have a romantic relationship with him (and it would be good for her! If she allowed herself to be happy like that), but the reason she is afraid of doing it is so relatable, because I have the exact same fear.

She knows Michael it's not like her, she thinks he will want things she can't provide. Like she said, at first he would say he is okay with that, but eventually he would get tired, tired of her.

We know that's obviously not true, but Tori really believes in it. Because it's Tori, she assumes nobody is able to love her and care for her, she doesn't get it very well. She doesn't think Michael is able to make this "sacrifice" only to be with her, she thinks she is not all that and he would give up at some point.

So, because her head is fucked up, she hurts herself before anybody can hurt her first. That really makes her so human, and so relatable to me. She is the only person who is just like me on this subject, she is without a doubt the best representation I have.

I really, really hope they include this part of Tori on the next season, really. Romantic asexual people need more space (please, let our icon Tori Spring come out on tv, we need her, we're desperate)

[nekropsii]

asking you this since you’re the only person who understands mituna in the entire fandom in my perception of the hs fandom

is it okay to headcanon mituna as autistic? sorry if you get this type of ask a lot/have already answered this type of ask

Instead of answering this question, I will give some food for thought: Mituna has a TBI. He has Brain Damage. This is a core element of his character. Probably the biggest one. In fact, it's so important to him that it's an injury that has remained with him in death. His TBI is a huge, huge part of what makes him... Well, him. It's why he's interesting.

So... Why is a need felt to also declare him as Autistic? Assuming this is a projection thing, since it tends to be most of the time - if you relate to him for his already canonical Neurodivergency, which is Brain Damage, why does one need to give him Autism as well?

Oftentimes when people headcanon him as Autistic, they tend to minimize or even outright erase his TBI. Oftentimes, people say he's Autistic as the reason he's canon Neurodivergent representation... Even though he's shown no real signs of it, but instead is fully written as a character with a Frontal Lobe Injury, and is constantly stated to have Brain Damage.

TBIs and other Neurodivergencies are often seen as less palatable than Autism. On Tumblr especially, it's far more "acceptable" to be Autistic or ADHD or headcanon a character as such than it is to have Brain Damage or literally any other Neurodivergency or acknowledge that a character is written with those. Autism and ADHD are seen as cute and relatable - even though they're very complex and at times devastating disabilities that do have the potential to seriously fuck up your livelihood, much like Depression and Anxiety, and I'm saying this as someone who has and struggles with all 4 - and are often used to erase the presence of other Neurodivergencies. Hell, it's to the point where people use "Neurodivergency" as a synonym for ADHD and Autism.

Again, I'm not going to answer this question for you. I think there's a way someone could potentially make the narrative of Mituna having Autism prior to the TBI compelling - the TBI has essentially stripped him of his ability to mask, after all, so one could make it be a situation where some of these symptoms are ones he already had, but is only just now really getting shit for because he's no longer able to hide it, and part of that tragedy is knowing that had he never been good at masking, his "friends" would have never accepted him. You could get some interesting questions about that. Was the repression worth it? Would it have been better if he'd just been himself the whole time? I think it's extremely valuable to ask yourself why you see any character as any specific minority - necessary, even - and how that affects not only the character's writing in its original text, but also your relationship with said character. Consider optics. Consider the way in which this character is meant to function in the source material. What purpose do they serve, and what is the driving force behind this character? Is Occam's Razor applicable? Are there other explanations as to why they are the way they are? Perhaps ones that are more succinct, and cover more ground?

Yesterday, I watched a film that has provoked a response in Tumblr that I think is applicable. I Saw The TV Glow. It's a film about a Trans Girl who never finds the strength to accept herself or come out. It's an incredibly gut-wrenching watch. It made me cry several times, and there are parts that made me feel a deep pain in my chest. I sat through 95% of the film with a pit in my stomach. I had to lay on the floor in the dark for a while after I finished. There's a scene where the main character is asked whether she likes girls or boys. She says she thinks she likes TV shows, and elaborates by saying that every time she tries to think about that kind of thing, it feels like someone's cutting her open and shoveling out her insides until there's nothing left. Not that there was anything in there to start with, of course - she says she knows there isn't, but she's too scared to look for herself and see.

That scene was about how Gender Dysphoria can completely disrupt your sexuality and repulse you from the thought of that level of connection with others, because it is, in essence, a deep disturbance with the nature of who you are as a person. Many people who are Asexual, or Aromantic, or both, related to that scene because it, on the surface, depicts discomfort with romance and sexuality. What they failed to understand by chalking it up to its own sexuality, is the fact that that scene wasn't depicting a Sex-Repulsed Asexual, or a Romance-Repulsed Aromantic, it was depicting a Trans Girl who is at such deep odds with herself and her identity that she cannot grapple with the concept of loving or being loved.

What, functionally, is the purpose of slapping an extraneous label onto a character that is meant to depict a certain thing? What is the purpose of assigning the label of "Autistic" to a character meant to depict the tragedy of a loss of support after gaining a disability, or "Aromantic" or "Asexual" to a character meant to depict a deep internal struggle with unresolved Gender Dysphoria?

Ask yourself these questions, and carry on from there. See where your mind takes you.

[miraculouslbcnreactions]

Adrien Agreste and Why Motivation Matters

One of the most important things you can gift a character is a motivation that correlates to their intended role in the story. It's a big part of how they truly come alive. And if they have a motivation that doesn't correlate to their role? That can make them come across as a total ass!

A few days ago I got an ask about Lila. I ended my response with this:

I'm totally fine with complex, master-manipulator Lila, it's just hard to figure out the best way to make her work when we don't know anything about her backstory or motivation.

This got me thinking about motivation in general and how much it plays into the show's poor writing. I talked about Lila above, but I wanted to point out how much it's responsible for Adrien's issues, too.

Motivations are one of the main ways you create strong characters. You come up with the thing they want and then keep that in mind whenever you're writing them. Motivations can be very simple and straight forward (I want to get home) or extremely complex and nuanced (a person wanting to create a new government with a very detailed idea of what that means). A character can even have multiple motivations!

Unfortunately, all motivation are not created equal. There is such a thing as a bad motivation and I'm not talking ethics or morality here. I'm talking about picking motivations that match the character's intended role. For example, Gabriel's motivation is fine! It perfectly suits a villain. On the other hand, Adrien's motivation sucks because it makes him into a terrible hero.

Adrien's motivation as given in the show seems to be this: win the heart of my Lady. Later on, that motivation changes to: date Marinette and be the best boyfriend possible. And that's it. He has no other overarching motivations. Individual episodes might give him a one-off motivation to jazz things up for a bit, but generally speaking, romance is all he cares about. It's why we get baffling moments like this one from Dark Cupid:

Cat Noir: Falling for me already, my lady? (pulls Ladybug down next to him) I need to talk to you. Ladybug: It’s gotta wait. Dark Cupi- Cat Noir: (hushes her) I swore to myself that I'd tell you as soon as I saw you. Ladybug, I-I... Look out! (Cat Noir spins around to shield Ladybug, and is struck by one of Dark Cupid's arrows.)

Or this one from Oblivio:

Nadja:(from a helicopter) Looks like Ladybug and Cat Noir are struggling today. (Ladybug is rapidly spinning her yo-yo to deflect Oblivio's blasts while Cat Noir sits down casually.) Ladybug: And stop calling us a couple!

These are just two out of many examples I can pull from, but they highlight a reoccurring issue: Adrien often doesn't take akumas seriously. He's been shown to happily prioritize flirting over fighting and, as a result, he's put himself, his Lady love, and all of Paris in danger.

It also gives us things like Kuro Neko and Kwami's Choice. Episodes where he quit without any concern for protecting his loved ones or even just protecting the freedom that comes with being Chat Noir, things that he only really cares about in the realms of fanfic. As far as the show is concerned, Adrien doesn't care about his loved ones or his freedom. His only constant driving force is his current crush.

Don't get me wrong, he's going to react if he sees Nino in danger or if his father bans him from going to a party! But in terms of what generally guides Adrien's actions? His father, Nathalie, Nino, Chloe, and Alya are out of sight, out of mind. And being able to leave the house? Well, who cares about that? He'll happily sacrifice freedom for a date. Outside of Origins, I think we only ever see him sneak out or otherwise break the rules so he can have a date.

You'll note that Marinette doesn't really have this problem*. While dating Adrien is a big motivation for her, she has a second motivation: protecting Paris. Sometimes those motivations clash, leading her to make poor choices, but that story never treats this as a good thing the way it does Chat Noir's endless flirting. Instead, Marinette's crush is treated as a character flaw or an interesting source of conflict like Volpina threatening to kill Adrien, making Ladybug having to chose between her two main motivations: love and duty.

This is why I've had several posts where I offhandedly mentioned Adrien needing a second motivation. It's also why I've mentioned that Gabriel should have been claiming that akumas were the main reason that Adrien was getting locked up because that's a really simple way to give Adrien personal stakes in the fight. Are those stakes selfish? Sure, but that's okay because it's a selfish motivation that doesn't go against being a hero. If Marinette was only being Ladybug for the sake of her parents, her motivation would be selfish, but still suited to a hero because it doesn't stop her from being heroic. It actually drives her to be heroic. As written, Adrien's motivations do the opposite. Whenever Ladybug or Marinette are seemingly safe, he will do very unheroic things because romance is his only main motivation and that's a problem. To make him work in his intended role, he needs to match Marinette and have (or discover) a motivation that suits a hero.

*To be extra clear and hopefully save myself a salty ask or two, I'm NOT saying that Marinette never does questionable things in the name of romance, she absolutely does. I'm saying that it's extremely rare for her romantic motivation to get in the way of keeping Paris safe because keeping Paris safe is her second motivation and it overrides the romantic one most of the time. Once an akuma is on the loose, she's usually all business. It's one of the reasons Passion (the episode where Nathalie becomes Safari) is so awkward. They did a full role reversal for Marinette and Adrien and it really doesn't work on Marinette's end because it feels out of character for Marinette to ignore the akuma threat in favor of flirting. She never did that for Adrien or Luka or even Catwalker. The worse we ever saw was a crush distracting her from making the right call, but even then, she was always at least trying to protect Paris. Compare Desperada (Viperion's debuted) to Passion and you'll see what I mean.

[mynqzo]

Hey heard you like vampires what are your thoughts on Twilight

it gets an unprecedented amount of hate mostly for being a show with an audience of young women and girls (so therefore people think oh girls like this so ew). its also undeniable that twilight very much shows the progression of how vampires are depicted in media and is an important facet in the history of vampire mythology especially in books/movies. it being a romance movie with cliche and maybe cringe scenes doesn't take away people's right to enjoy it and by extent its version of vampires (id argue that twilight vampires are just a spiritual successor to vampires like lestate or 'romantic vamps' in general)

with that being said, it is the straightest and most mormon vampire depiction which therefore makes it less enjoyable for me! vampires, historically, existed to represent minorities and people who were considered outcasts to 'normal' society and were first and foremost used as caricatures for racist, lgbtq-phobic and sexist stereotypes, so i feel like their reclamation by queers, poc and minorities in general is the only good way to depict them. bram stoker's dracula represented the english man's fear of jewish immigrants (and immigrants in general, the visual description of dracula in that book plays into popular caricatures of jews during those times), eastern europeans, and queer people (dracula and jonathan yada yada as well as the wives of dracula initiating a saucy moment with jonathan which was a man' job because the man was the pursuer and the woman was pursued, but the roles were reversed. also, i don't think i need to tell you how fangs, blood and the extension of dracula through his wives were used as a gay metaphor). and carmilla by sheridan le fanu, depicting the imagery of a predatory lesbian hunting for innocent upper-class women. during these times vampires were not yet characters with complex personalities and values, but folklore monsters in a way, a way to show an enemy and defeat it rather than learn to understand them, which was a product of its time.

fast forward to the vampire chronicles and especially interview with the vampire by anne rice, vampires became complex people, who's oddities were considered alluring, beautiful, queer and unabashedly proud of it. descriptions of androgynous men, womens love of each other, several nods to gay culture throughout the books with the characters themselves having more to them than just being monsters (with that being said there are several critiques of an interview with the vampire, esp the original book, it is by no means the creme de la creme of queer rep in vampire literature!)

so, circling back, twilight vampires were in themselves like that, kind of. edward wasn't exactly the most macho man as was popular to faun over in media, he was, kind of, more androgenous and sensitive and a character with complex values and thoughts - but that doesn't take away from the fact that the book is lacking a lot of soul and seemingly doesn't show the true reasons why vampires became so popular (amongst young queers especially who found themselves relating to this sense of otherness because of who they were. it is a very sanitized version of a vampire romance, which doesn't mean its bad or that people shouldn't like it! but i'm just saying.

huff

[crimsonhydrangeavn]

I really love the game demo so far. I’ve watched day 1 and 2 of the demo played by a Let’s Player I follow. The writing is beautiful and I very much like Garret.

That being said, why is the “bad” and “toxic” character the only nonbinary one? I’m nonbinary and use they/them pronouns exclusively myself, so it’s a bit painful to see the toxic ex character be the only one that’s the same gender as me, and I’m sure to other nonbinary people like me.

Can you tell me the reasoning behind making Teagan nonbinary? Or why there aren’t any redeemable characters that are nonbinary? I understand it’s just fiction, but also nonbinary people don’t really get a lot of representation in fiction especially not in dating sims.

Thank you to much for reaching out and letting me know how you found out about Crimson Hydrangea VN and how much you've enjoyed the game and Garret so far! I'm assuming the Let's Player you're referring to is Espoir Du Vide since she's the only one who I've seen make a video about CHVN. I've been following her for a little while and I'm fan of hers as well. She has a wonderful soothing voice and her jokes/memes really make me laugh!

I also want to thank you for feeling comfortable enough to send me such a sensitive and completely legitimate concern. Thank you for phrasing it in such a respectful and straightforward manner. I'm always open to all forms of feedback and am always open to learning and hearing others out.

That being said, I completely hear your concerns and I can understand where you're coming from. Unfortunately Teagan hasn't had a lot of screen time compared to others in the game (Only really showing up in Day 2). And the limited screen time that they have had hasn't really shown them in the best light.

Of course, I'll go into more depth as to why that is down below just in case people don't want to risk being spoiled.

I also summarized what I wrote below for those who don't want to risk seeing spoilers but want to know the main points of what I said.

Teagan isn't inherently bad and they are redeemable.

While their gender expression is an important part of them and their backstory, their gender isn't and should never be considered a factor as to why they're toxic.

They're toxic because of their actions, not because of who they are as a person or what they identify as.

I also apologize that Teagan's current perception is painful for you and others. That was never my intention and I'm genuinely sorry it's come across that way.

!POTENTIAL SPOILERS BELOW!

Teagan's current perception is completely overshadowed by the fact that they're your ex and you had a terrible dramatic break up. The game currently doesn't go into the decade or so of history you two have. All the sweet and meaningful moments between the two of you, how utterly devoted they were to you, how they supported you through difficult times and vice versa.

Unfortunately you're seeing them through the eyes of an ex who is still processing a rough break up and suppressing/ actively ignoring all of the positive traits they originally fell in love with.

That being said, I will say that Teagan has to be one of the most complex characters I've written. Yes, they are flawed but that doesn't mean they are inherently "bad". Their negative actions are currently overshadowing their positive traits. Teagan does have the capability to grow and learn and improve themselves, if you decide to go down that route in the game.

There were several reasons why I made Teagan nonbinary, and I can assure you that none of them were malicious or ill intended.

I don't necessarily want to go into all of the reasons as to why I made them nonbinary since I feel as though it'll spoil a few key elements about their backstory that I plan on revealing in game.

Instead I'll focus on one of the main reasons you actually mentioned in your ask, Representation.

For me, representation doesn't mean that they need to always be painted in the best light. Yes, they shouldn't be painted in a stereotypical or hateful way, but I also don't think they should be shown as perfect and flawless.

You see, I personally adore character development. A complex and flawed character who learns and grows from the people and situations around them to become a "better person" is my favorite kind of character arc.

What better way to honor Teagan than to show their journey of character growth during Crimson Hydrangea? Or at least that's what my thought process is/was.

I also wanted to mention that Teagan and Garret were created to be foils of each other. Yes, they're both yanderes, but they're still completely different kinds of people.

Garret comes off as very sweet and charming because you're only seeing him on a surface level. That perfect version of Garret is a facade he wears for you and others. There's a deep rooted darkness to him that you'll see in later days and you'll discover just how horribly toxic he is/can become. (Perhaps even more so than Teagan...)

Teagan on the other hand, has already shown you their toxicity. It's all come to light because of the break up and there's no hiding from it. You know them better than anyone else and that has it's pros and cons. Depending on the route you choose, they can either dig their heels in and become the worst version of themselves, or they can finally face reality and take accountability for their actions and start to heal as a person ( and potentially as a partner if you so choose.)

I hope my in depth explanation has helped you understand where I'm coming from and see that there was no intended slight meant towards those who identify as nonbinary.

With all of that being said, I will apologize that Teagan's current perception is painful for you and others. That was never my intention and I'm genuinely sorry it's come across that way.

[one-of-tankhuns-neurons]

What's the difference between a BL and a queer drama?

Easy!!

BL's has intentional focus on a love story between to males and it can vary in genre. It can go from typical romance soaps with cliché plotlines and sappy confessions, to intense thrillers and murder mysteries.

Queers drama may include romance but it isn't the main point. It highlights queer experiences and emotions such as family dynamics, coming out, life stories, forming bonds, etc. It also understands queer identity as more complex, which is why characters may diverge from the cis homosexual.

Now LISTEN TO ME... BL can show actual queer dynamics the same way a kdrama about a girl who falls in love with a rich CEO can slip on some important commentary on women experiences or even class disparity. One is nOt inherently better than the other. Calling something a BL doesn't make the way it talks about the importance of found family and building a support system not based on kin less valuable. Especially now that more queer people are getting involved in it. But we must remember BL has it's origins in fantasies (not necessarily sexual) so that's the way it's gonna lean. Yes people, history and tradition of literary and cinematic currents and genres IS important when defining it.

Here are some shows that are BL

2gether - University drama

Jack and Joker - crime

On Cloud Nine - supernatural

609 Bedtime story- sci-fi

'till the world ends - apocalyptic

This love doesn't have long beans- cooking

Bad Guy my Boss - CEO x secretary

Here are some shows that (according to me) are queer dramas

Shadow - supernatural mystery

180 longitude passes through us - family drama

Love in the big city - anthology (kinda?)

More than words - dealing with the norm

1626 - coming of age

Right time right you - drama

I understand that the lines may be blurred sometimes but it's mainly because people are using BL as a trampoline to get to a wider audience but in reality are not producing strictly BL stories.

The point in knowing the difference is just so that you know what you might or might not get with each one, and it's NOT THE QUALITY or the director.

180 degree longitude and 7 days before valentine were directed by the same person but one is BL and one is a Queer drama.

(I didn't include queer drama focusing on Trans, lesbian, asexual experiences bc the point here is to make a comparison and those are least likely to be compared)

You are allowed to disagree with me

Thank you for coming to my TED talk

[wellen-katze]

I see that you are into Asccendent Astarion. Do you have and do you plan to make Spawn Astarion comics (even one shots)? Do you think Astarion is truly evil/roten to the core? Do you think he can have his redemption if he is given a chance?

Oh, I've already drawn some Spawn Astarion comics. I just don't title them 'Spawn' because, well, Spawn Astarion is Astarion lol~ But yes, I'd like to draw some more Spawn Astarion comics.

Well, Ascended Astarion is pretty much written like a disney villian. He wants to take over Baldur's Gate without any remorse, so I suppose you could call those actions 'evil.' But there are also things that surprised me about him. For example, the dialogue options when you romance Karlach with him. If Karlach tells Astarion she wants to die instead of going to Avernus, he is pretty much the worst person ever, and while Spawn Astarion weeps, Ascended Astarion seems to be nearly disgusted by that weakness and acts like, 'well then just go die.' But there is also the loyal side of him, and if Karlach wants to go to Avernus, he will follow. More because he thinks about the power he could get from it than anything else, but still, he actually goes with his partner to the Hells, and that shows how very important bonds are to the character. Maybe it's not really 'love,' but he cares about you, perhaps like you would care about a billion-dollar bracelet (I would care a lot).

The question 'if a character like Ascended Astarion can change' is even more complex (and obviously only the original writer could give you the right answer) because one of the problems about the ascension is that we don't really know 100% what the contract meant. In the end, it was Cazador who made the contract. And I think the game told us enough times that you can never trust a devil. The possibility is high that Astarion lost a part of his former soul. All in all, a 'true' vampire is closer to a mindless monster than ever. And if that is the case, there would probably be no way back.

To me, the ascension stands for a decision a person can take in life. A worldview that you won't get hurt if you have more power than other people. Astarion wants to take that path from the start, and the ascension is like the ultimate agreement.

So to sum it up: Yeah, he is pretty evil, and no, I don't think he could change because, well, why would he want to haha~

[sam24seven]

Akashi. A very interesting and complex character from knb. This is my personal take on why I kin him. Feel free to add anything you'd like or tell me what you think, any and all feedback is welcome. Also my first language isn't English so sorry in advance for any mistakes I made.

So. Why do I relate to Akashi you ask? Well this one is a long one but I already talked to a lot of people about his character so I think I'll be pretty good at giving a summary about this.

Akashi is a character from the anime kuroko's basketball, he's introduced to us as the antagonist at first, as a crazy, sadistic perfectionist and a controlling person. As the show progresses, we find out he has DID, dissociative identity disorder which means his more "evil" personality (bokushi) is another part of his personality that gets out when he feels scared or threatened, a defense mechanism he developed to deal with the pressure he faced.

Akashi had a pretty hard childhood, with his dad being a strict father and a workaholic that demanded perfection from him, and his mother, the only person he felt loved and comfortable with after all of the things his dad made him face, dying (or disappearing, I don't think it has been confirmed) when he was around 9.

A feeling that was present a lot in his childhood was pressure, and therefore, a paralyzing, vital, overwhelming need to escape. Pressure to be perfect, pressure to live up to his name, pressure to be strong, to not make any mistakes, to not show any weaknesses, to not have any weaknesses, it's not that you can't show your vulnerability it's that you can't have vulnerability. You can't be human, you can't be flawed, you can't try you can only succeed flawlessly while looking like you didn't even try. Which is why akashi could never love himself, he was taught he should be perfect, that he's more then that, more then other people, more then himself, more then a human. Every time he finished a workload he needed to do, his father gave him twice the amount he did, because it was never about getting the mission accomplished, it was about making akashi the perfect robot, the perfect tool, the perfect son, the perfect soldier.

Something that standed out to me that akashi said once, and that I think summarizes perfectly why I relate to him so much, is him comparing winning to breathing. Now, it might look like what he was trying to say is that, like breathing, winning comes naturally to him, which is probably what he means to say, but the thing is breathing is not only something that you do naturally but something that you have to do to live. It's vital, and without it, you can't survive.

Akashi sees winning like breathing, something he has to do to live, like those cringy shirts that say "eat, sleep, watch anime, repeat" just that instead of watching anime it's winning because in his mind he must win. He needs to win. He has to.

In the battle against seirin, while akashi perhaps didn't want to lose, he needed to. And I think deep down in his original personality, he knew that he needed to feel what it's like to lose, to truly understand that winning is just a thing, and he doesn't have to do it to be worth something or survive. He can fail, and he'll still be there. He's human. He needed to fail so that loss will wake him up from the trance he was in. for Akashi, winning and being the best isn't just about success, it's a fundamental part of his identity and existence, something he feels he must do to justify his worth and existence. The loss serves as a turning point for Akashi, allowing him to realize that failure doesn't mean the end of his identity or worth. It helps him begin to connect with his other self again, and accept that he doesn't need to be perfect to have value.

Another thing that's important to mention is that the reason akashi's second personality is sadistic, mean, a bad person and all those other things, is because he feels like he's not enough of those things. Which is what I think a lot of the fandom gets wrong sometimes because the reason he has this personality in the first place is to protect himself from having to be those things all the time when he couldn't take it. He's not this strong, uncaring, cold, dominant person, he's scared and alone and feels like he has to be those things but he's can't. And that's where bokushi comes in. He's everything that akashi want to be but can't, sure they're similar in a lot of things because akashi himself is a smart and capable person, but the reason bokushi exist in the first place it to be all the things akashi had to be but couldn't.

I didn't exactly say what about him makes me relate to him because it's everything, this feeling that if you're not perfect, if you don't win in everything, it's not that you're worthless but you just can't comprehend it. It's not scary it's terrifying. it's chilling, incomprehensible, paralyzing. I relate to this feeling of acting like you're mean and perfect and can do everything and nothing bothers you, but you still want to run and hide and just have this perfect self that doesn't feel pain or guilt or love. He's a scared, pathetic, wear person, and he hides behind his other self because he's so terrified of the idea of not being what he needs to be. This is why I relate to him.

I have a lot more to say about this character and about so many others, so if you want me to write anything else I'll be glad to, just leave a request for me!

[uptoolateart]

Hey, hey, hey - time for a Gabriel analysis!

So. After we learned that Gabriel Agreste wasn't his original name, my mind jumped to Andre Bourgeois, who also once had a different name. In keeping with the themes of the show, we are seeing that secret identities don't always come with masks and comic book names.

We had a hint of Gabriel's secret past in Psycomedian, when Harry visited and alluded to his Gabi days. How, oh how could the Gabriel Agreste we all know have ever been friends with someone like Harry Clown? This is only possible if he was once a different sort of person.

We had further clues in Gabriel's vision of the past, in the time burrow in Evolution - and in Emilie's video messages left for Nathalie, and the photographs of Gabriel, Emilie and Nathalie on some expedition, seen in Passion - and in Amelie's accusation that Gabriel has changed, in Emotion.

Adrien is also aware his father has changed with time, demonstrated when he tells Gabriel that Emilie once said they came from different backgrounds.

The photos shown in Revelation finally gave concrete evidence that Gabriel used to have an adventurous spirit and he used to smile. He was fun...but something changed...and I don't think it was just Emilie's death that caused the personality shift. Based on casual comments Adrien has made throughout the series, his father has been strange for years.

Gabriel tells Adrien that he and Kagami are 'of the same design' - and we know he means this literally. But taking it as a metaphor...for two seasons I've wondered what Emilie's parents were like. We can infer that she comes from a wealthy, 'important' family. Maybe Gabriel struggled to fit in and win the approval of his in-laws. Maybe he never felt good enough. When he tells Adrien things like, 'You're clinging to Marinette because her mediocrity lets you shine more,' perhaps someone once talked like that about him. With that kind of background, it would be unsurprising that he decided to try to forge a new identity.

And let's remember that Gabriel is a designer. His whole empire is founded on inventing personae. Even beyond the sentimonster aspect, he tells Marinette that he designed the image the world holds of his son. Everything is his invention. That speech in Pretension proved just how deep his God complex runs - he fully believes he has made the world in his image. Even the episode title - Pretension - smacks of the image he is presenting to the world in lieu of truth.

At this point, what we're seeing is a 'new money' stereotype - a self-made man who now spurns those who remind him of where he came from. It's one of the most shameful things about him. No matter how much fame and money you get...you can't forget your roots, people. Maybe that's easy for me to say because I'm not rich or famous. But I just can't imagine turning my back on my own origin story. It's what makes you who you are. Gabriel clearly didn't want to be that person anymore...and that's sad.

What's also fascinating is that, if we zoom in on those pictures Nathalie took in Revelation, we see that once upon a time, Gabriel - Gabi Grassette - was a punk. Let's take a moment to appreciate the spiked hair, makeup, leather jacket, ripped jeans, and dog collar - not to mention that smirk. And far from being ashamed of his work with Harry Clown as a human frites (who, by the way, reminds me so much of Mr Banana), he was smiling about it. Man, he loved it. Contrast that with Gabriel in Party Crasher - 'JOY.... What's going on in my HOUSE!?'

If it were at all possible for the old Gabi to meet Cat Noir, I can imagine him loving Cat's costume. On that note, I can't help but compare that dog collar with Cat's bell. I've said before that I see the bell as a symbol of Cat being domesticated and under control. Gabi probably saw his dog collar more as a rebellion, but maybe it too is a symbol of how he once felt controlled by someone.

The thing is...the punk movement was all about anti-establishment anti-authoritarianism. Today, Gabriel is the establishment he once rebelled against. It makes me think of John Lydon of the Sex Pistols turning Conservative and advertising butter. Musicians like Donovan - not a punk, but in a similar category, as a 1960s hippie - are rare for maintaining that same spirit all through their lives.

Gabriel is a 'sell-out'. He gave up that spirit and became someone unrecognisable. Those photos demonstrate that Emilie isn't the only body buried in a 'basement' in the Agreste mansion. There is a different person buried under the cold veneer that is Gabriel - a person Nathalie probably misses. I expect that's why she's stuck with him all this time, despite her better instincts. Something tells me Gabi would've made a better father.

The irony is that Adrien's moments of rebellion are probably one of the few things he has in common with his father, if we look far enough back in Gabriel's past. That, and their temper - and randomly breaking into eccentric dance and song. Gabi might have appreciated Adrien more for standing true to his principles. Maybe Adrien sometimes reminds Gabriel of himself and he can't stand it - can't stand thinking of what he's lost along the way.

I believe Gabriel exists in a perpetual state of regret. Part of him probably misses Gabi, too. After all, Gabi got Emilie. What has Gabriel got? Wealth, sure, but Emilie's dead, Adrien all but hates him, Nathalie's wasting away, and Gabriel himself has only weeks to live.

If you think about it, Gabriel's whole quest has been about getting a do-over. He wants a second chance with Emilie - a second chance for Nathalie - a second chance at his own life. He then tells Adrien that his greatest wish is to try to reconnect with him...because he knows he doesn't have much time left with his son. Even then, though, his selfishness prevails. (Psst, Gabi...you can't make up for years of terrible parenting with banana pancakes.)

Thinking of the snake miraculous, the second chance lets you know what's going to happen, enabling you to make better decisions the next time around. In other words: it's about learning from your mistakes. Gabriel never learns, and it is his refusal to accept destiny and his own human fallibility that is causing his disintegration.

The more Gabriel necrotises, the more we can see this as his 'sins' catching up with him. He doesn't seem to grasp that all the blackness devouring him is, in a way, the blackness of his own heart. Even if he erases the whole world, he can't erase his deeds. If he managed to get his Wish and bring Emilie back, she would be horrified. She'd wonder where her Gabi went.

Gabriel is proof that 'evolution' isn't always positive. He reinvented himself once, and now, because it didn't go the way he wanted, he's trying to reinvent things again. Tomoe also hints at a belief that the solution to her problems is to make the world anew - to get a second chance. Felix tries this, too, when he creates the red moon to wipe out all people except his select group.

But Felix does learn - Ladybug helps him see that even if you erase all the people causing you so much grief...you still have to deal with that pain. What Gabriel fails to see is that - like Cat Blanc on the roof, all alone without his lady - destroying your witnesses won't remove the witness in your own heart.

Even if Gabriel wiped everyone else's memory of his crimes, he would still know what he'd done. And when you cross those kinds of lines, you can never go back to who you once were.

Please no post-Revelation spoilers in the comments :)

[mywitchyblog]

A lot of the people who are so against race changing make no sense. I saw this one that said that “If you shift for empathy reasons, you have low empathy.” And then five seconds later said “you can’t understand because you’re not a poc!” what is it? Do you want me to have empathy, or am I suddenly not allowed to because apparently according to you only black people have experienced oppression and can understand that feeling?

Do they not realize that there are people who qualify as white and still face racial discrimination? People who are German, Ukrainian, Polish, Russian, Iranian and Egyptian, and many more?

The hypocrisy and double standards are annoying and it makes no sense.

Fundamentally, race is a social construct with no scientific or biological basis. To legitimate something we often see in society: that there is only one race, the human race, and the so-called other "races" are just a sign of a superiority complex that has festered far too long in humanity, bringing us nothing but strife and pain. To claim that some individuals who engage in race changing during reality shifting lack empathy is not only hypocritical but fundamentally flawed.

The idea that race-changing is a sign of lack of empathy or moral failing is untrue. It's clear to see that the condemnation of race changers often blurs the context of oppression and suffering, which exists in countless forms over a very wide spectrum.

It is always important to remember that oppression does not form one solid experience solely for any one group; it takes place in many different contexts, and yet all are based on prejudice of physical appearance or place of origin.

Although the following examples do not reveal racial oppression in its classic sense, they certainly can be viewed as forms of marginalization that rely on superficial factors, such as how a person looks, comes across, or where they are from. It needs to be taken into consideration by anyone that while the experience of oppression varies widely for many, there is a shared foundation of discrimination.

The race-changing controversy in the reality shifting community shows a mirror to this hypocrisy and double standard around most of these arguments, especially people who shift into "fictional" races. Many people will shift into races that are clearly meant to be allegories for real-world POC populations, such as the Na'vi in "Avatar," whether in white or BIPOC spaces.

Why is it then that shifting into a fictional race, oftentimes one that serves as an allegory for the struggles of real-world oppressed groups, is considered acceptable, while shifting into a different human ethnicity is considered to be taboo?

A prime example is the Na'vi from "Avatar."

I have seen white people and BIPOC shift into this race, completely unconcerned, because it is "fictional." But, well, of course this race is basically an allegory for Indigenous peoples: fighting colonization, preserving their culture. Shifting into a Na'vi could be described as shifting into the experience of being Native American with some blue paint on top of it.

But when someone is asked what urges them to become Na'vi, most people reply that they want to "discover the culture," "understand what it feels like to resist oppression," or "experience the beauty of their world." But it is because the Na'vi are considered fictional that they don't receive the same attention as the human ethnic group. This is the core of the hypocrisy: those who bash one for shifting to a different human ethnicity are doing the same, only it is in a supposed "safer" context—around fiction.

They overlook the fact that both types of shifting are fueled by similar, often innocent and pure-hearted intentions, only to explore, understand, and relate with experiences other than the ones outside of one's original identity.

By holding such double standards, critics ignore the broader implications of their arguments and reveal more about their own comfort with real-world racial issues than about any supposed moral failing on the part of those who engage in race changing.

Engage in all discussions here, with consistency and empathy; understand that reality shifting—whether it be into a fictional or human race—can serve profoundly in your tool of personal growth, empathy development, and deeper cultural understanding.

[queer-ragnelle]

Hi! I was wondering if you had any advice on how to craft a well-written, compelling Arthurian OC that isn't obnoxious or out of place but is still unique. I recognize the difficulty in doing so with so many different source texts (I'm most familiar with Le Morte, so that's usually my go-to) and the vast list of already existing characters. I'm just curious about your thoughts on the matter, since you're an author and also very knowledgeable about Arthuriana 💖

Hello there!

This is a tough question to answer! I think it's important to note that everyone will have a different opinion on this, but that shouldn't alter you writing your story how you want to. Some think adding any characters at all is too big of a change, while others write a full cast of original characters and then Merlin shows up randomly and makes the story "Arthurian."

I'm going to say something controversial.

Every Arthurian character is an OC.

Even King Arthur himself is an OC.

I'm going to elaborate on this quite a bit, as it's very important to me. But the TL;DR is that reading more will definitely help you conceptualize the boundaries of what's possible. Le Morte d'Arthur is a great start, but there's so much out there, both medieval and modern, that'll undoubtedly aid in your Arthuriana writing journey! :^)

While I do say things like "I love Arthurian OCs" as a means to convey that I view everyone's new creations as valid and interesting, I actually don't believe in a strong differentiation between Chretien de Troyes' Sir Lancelot or Marie of France's Sir Lanval and what you or I are writing today. We're participating in a tradition which can, at times, necessitate the creation of a new character or repurposing of an existing one. I think as soon as you create a character for your Arthurian story, they're an Arthurian character. Some refer to Lancelot or Galahad as "French OCs" or call Knight of the Cart or the Vulgate "fanfiction" as a means to degrade it's validity. Some seem to have an arbitrary timeline on which the full body of Arthurian works is measured, and the more recently something was written, the less authentic it becomes. I think they're wrong. I believe that whether or not we enjoy an installment in the ever expanding Arthurian tradition is irrelevant; it's all equally entitled to a measure of respect, even the new characters. No character or story is lesser than another by virtue of its age or language of origin or target audience or medium. I disdain the excess of scrutiny put upon certain arbitrary groupings of Arthurian tradition. Each story is full of original characters and building on the foundations of what came before. That's the nature of creative influence. Whether or not Arthur was a real person at some point in history is moot. The guy in the Mabinogion or the Vulgate or Le Morte d'Arthur or BBC Merlin is a character. He's a tool to tell a story. Such as your creation will be! Your brand new Arthurian character stands equally with all the rest who preceded them. :^)

Now, it can be helpful to distinguish between a medieval character and a modern one, sure, as they may represent different things depending on what point in history (or part of the world) they were created in. But Arthuriana isn't a franchise one must obtain express permission to contribute to, and it doesn't have a "canon," so therefore differentiating a character as "other" can be counter productive when developing a story. I don't believe Sir Robin from Monty Python and The Holy Grail (1975) or Brian from The Adventures of Sir Lancelot (1956-1957) are any less valuable as characters, even if they do draw on traits of existing Arthurian motifs in order to commentate on them or otherwise expand. In fact I think they're great characters and serve their narrative roles beautifully. One simple and one complex. I recommend watching those to see how it's done well and that may help you develop your own characters. But I'll delve into it a bit here to illustrate what I mean.

Sir Robin carries the coat of arms of a chicken, he's a cowardly knight followed around by a troupe of musicians that sing songs about all of his exploits. That is, the things he's run away from. Rather than use an existing Arthurian character and degrading them, Monty Python developed Sir Robin in order to tell their joke.

The flipside is Brian, a bona fide kitchen boy, who attaches himself to Sir Lancelot and desires to squire for him. Brian's narrative purpose is to deconstruct the nobility in a way that Gareth Beaumains, whom Brian is plainly inspired by, could not. Brian begins as a true serf forced to endear himself to Sir Lancelot to elevate his station. Merlin forges papers of nobility to convince King Arthur that Brian is worthy of this privilege. Even after that, Brian must face the brutality of his fellows while living in the barracks with them, as they don't take kindly to a "smelly kitchen boy" in their midst, plotting to get Brian to incriminate himself as a thief and get evicted from Camelot by Sir Kay. This role is incongruous with Gareth as Sir Gawain's brother, who was always noble, always a prince, and merely cloaked himself in the guise of poverty to prove a point. Gareth could return to the comforts of wealth whenever it suited him and his reason for going stealth was to intentionally distance himself from that privilege. The character Brian exists in order to commentate on the injustice of the upper class's oppression and dehumanization of the lower class in a way Gareth, or even Tor, could not, as they are of noble blood, even if it came by way of reveal. That's why Brian is a great addition to the Arthurian tradition.

Really, it comes down to treating the creation of your new Arthurian character like you would developing one for any other work, one entirely separate from the tradition. If they're a good character, they're a good character! Try not to get hung up too much on whether or not they're going to mesh well with the rest of the cast. For centuries, writers have transformed historical figures into Arthurian characters. (See: King Mark of Kernow better known as the Cuckhold King from the Prose Tristan, Owain mab Urien better known as Sir Yvain from Knight of the Lion by Chretien de Troyes, Saint Derfel better known as Derfel Gadarn from The Warlord Chronicles by Bernard Cornwell, etc.)

Speaking of Prose Tristan, would anyone consider Sir Dinadan an OC? Or Sir Palomides? They're characters added to a story drawing from a much, much older tradition, and I think they enrich the story. I feel likewise about the many Perceval Continuations, including the German Parzival by Wolfram von Eschenbach, which adds a half brother named Sir Feirefiz, or names Chretien's anonymous haughty maiden Orgeluse. What about Sir Aglovale's son Moriaen in the Dutch tradition? Amurfina in German Diu Krone by Heinrich von dem Türlin? Morgan le Fay's daughter Puzella Gaia in Italian La Tavola Ritonda? Not to mention the countless Middle English additions. The Green Knight and his wife? Dame Ragnelle and Sir Gromer? Or how about everyone's favorite Savage Damsel, Lynette of Castle Perilous? Is she not a late-era addition to the tradition courtesy of the man, the myth, the legend, Sir Thomas Malory himself? And then here comes Tennyson, who read Le Morte d'Arthur, and got to the end of dear Gareth Beaumains' story and had the same reaction we all did: "What the hell? He marries her sister?" And then he went about changing that in Idylls of the King. Speaking of Lynette, what's up with her niece Laurel? She's just a name on a page, the vast majority of retellings choose to ignore her, even if they do keep Lynette and Lyonesse. Laurel can scarcely be called a character, after all. She doesn't even have dialogue. So as I've gone out of my way to make her a prominent, fully developed character, with her own culture and back story and motivations, does that make her an OC of mine? And Henry Newbolt who included Laurel in his play Mordred: A Tragedy. And Sarah Zettel, who wrote from Laurel's point of view in Camelot's Blood. We did all the work, but we threw an Arthurian name on the character, so therefore, she isn't ours? But if we changed her name, she would be? Who gets to decide?

All of the Arthurian characters belong to all of us. That's the beauty of writing in a long-standing tradition, which exists apart from all other forms of writing. We have complete creative liberty to do what we want and refer to it how we want and no person or corporation or anyone can dictate otherwise. The intellectual property of Arthuriana belongs to the people. So invent a brand new wife for Gawain, and well, you're only the millionth author to do it! Just make sure she's an interesting character and that's literally the only requirement. Can't wait to meet her. (And all others you create!)

Have a great day!

[anotherbluesunday]

✨Teaser: In Technicolor✨

So some of you may know this, but my next fic that was set to release was originally called “Ballad of a Teenage Dream” and was a Wednesday x Skam crossover that showcased all the highs and lows of high school and the growing pains that come with the transition from teenager to young adult.

Well that story has been reworked, overhauled, and given new life.

I present to you my high school dramady, In Technicolor.

Set in Los Angeles, California, the story follows two groups of friends as their worlds collide. A modern spin on the social dynamics of Romeo and Juliet where two factions are warring but cannot remember why or why their bitter rivalry is so important to their identity, In Technicolor highlights the feuding of the wealthy and the everyday citizens to show the consequences that come from stripping culture and history from the city streets in the name of gentrification. It explores the complex relationships of families on either side of the fence to reveal that wealth does not always bring happiness. And finally, at the center of it all, the complicated friendships and relationships of the members of these two groups as they meld into one.

For our East LA champions, we follow the Addams siblings and their mismatched group of skateboarders, graffiti artists, musicians, and street racers.

For our Palisades elite, we focus on the Blossoms and Galpin’s—two families from extreme wealth that are not entirely honest about what they show the world.

.

.

.

Important Story Information: If the visuals were not enough to give it away, this story will be a crossover with a different fandom. Entering the mix is the ensemble from Riverdale. I do want to caution readers now, there will be crossover pairings, character retcon on both sides, ageing up, ageing down, and changes to character personalities.

One such example is that Wednesday isn’t allergic to color and isn’t entirely unapproachable. She smiles and laughs but only when around those she trusts like her family and friends. Pugsley has been aged up and is Wednesday’s twin brother. My face claim for this version of Pugsley is Xolo Mariduẽna and I have made Pugsley (who also will be going by “Lee”) more confident and hotheaded with some snark and sass. Second to that, my face claim for Pubert “Bertie” Addams is Malachi Barton and Pubert/Bertie will be one year younger than his siblings—the twins Wednesday and Pugsley age 17 and in their senior year and Bertie age 16 entering his junior year.

On the Riverdale side of the crossover, I have made certain changes that I don’t want to reveal just yet for Archie’s character. That surprise will come soon enough because next I will be posting moodboards for specific couples that will be at the center of this story. But one change I will discuss now to get it out there to avoid hate comments and harassment is the issue of is Cheryl bi or is she a lesbian. In my story, she’s bi and will be paired with a male lead. I understand that the actress for her character went back and forth on Cheryl’s orientation but, to me, Cheryl reads like a chaotic bisexual that goes back and forth on her identity because being bi is confusing enough. And as someone who is bi, I would like to see more representation and fiction for people like myself because fandoms are so quick to erase bisexuality and pansexuality and criticize us when we speak up about it. So in this story, Cheryl is bi and she has broken up with her most recent girlfriend before meeting her next partner who is a man. And it’s fine.

If this upsets you, just swipe off of this post. Don’t leave mean comments or take digs at me because I’m not for any of this fandom infighting nonsense. It’s fiction and these characters can be whatever you want them to be in your stories.

However, if you don’t mind Cheryl liking both men and women, you don’t have an opinion either way, or your curious to see how this’ll pan out, stay tuned. I’d love to share this story with you. All are welcome so long as things stay civil and breezy.

So with that, I look forward to updating with the couple’s board and then the first chapter titlecard along with the chapter itself. Until then, stay lovely and stay groovy.💜