#but yeah imo most people's interpretations of these characters are based on like.

[spekktors]

seeing the results on polls like "which bg3 companion is mostly likely to x" just confirms to me how many people haven't done the Galemance. you know nothing about this man beyond the memes about eating boots and it shows

[crumb-crumblet-s-crumbington]

the woobification of the lords is something ill never be able to wrap my head around 😭 its insane to me how people can have such a horrible interpretation of events and characters based off of what we have in the actual game

let me start off by saying that ALL FOUR LORDS DID HORRIBLE THINGS (INCLUDING THE DIMITRESCU DAUGHTERS) !

lady dimitrescu isnt some gentle giant who only hates men and loves women and treats them like queens and she just loves living a quiet life with her daughters, she kills and tortures people 😭😭 she like actively killed her maids and drank their blood 😭 they have a basement that has so much blood in it that it goes up to ethans THIGHS

they are muderous and SADISTIC, including the daughters

the woobfication of the dimitrescu daughters is always the most confusing to me. their faces are literally covered in BLOOD 😭😭 they chase ethan around and stab him will laughing and giggling, cassandra literally calls it a HUNT, it is fun to them and they enjoy it

people always try to frame it as ethan breaking into their homes while they are scared and afraid 😭 i can assure you that nobody is afraid of him at first 😭 they dont think hes an actual threat, thats why they toy with him. and dont act like they were unaware of what he wanted. they were all present at the family meeting with miranda, they were all present when they JARRED rosemary 😭 they know what ethan wants, they know who ethan is, to frame them as "minding their own business" is the most absurd interpreation you could make of them

they were all involved, they all knew what he wanted, and they all HAD what he wanted

you can feel sympathy for lady D, when she cries for her daughters with tears in her eyes, she loved them, they were her family, but you cannot deny the hypocrisy. "how can you kill my daughters for your own!" you have his daughters head in a pickle jar! her daughters werent innocent defenless babies who were scared of big ol ethan stomping around in their house, they have weapons! they wanted to hurt him, and they did, and when he fought back he won

i cannot stress enough that in every single fight, ethan is not the first to strike. he is either backed into a corner where its either his life or theirs, or he is literally being tortured/ chased around, what do you want him to do? these people have pieces of his baby, should he have lied down and died?? 😭

whenever ethan is in a situation where the other person isnt stabbing him in the abdomen 100 times he tries to HELP them 😭 he tries to help absoulute strangers of a village he doesnt even know while he knows his own daughter is missing, even when the stranger is also a jerk to him 😭 he wants allies, he isnt actively trying to make enemys, and before you cry "karl heisenberg!" im getting there...

the thing that bothers me with how people treat donna is that although she isnt the WORST she gets woobfied the MOST imo, like she is the ONLY lord (other than karl but hes a outlier because he wanted ethan to come over so they could make out on his bed) who actively lures ethan in, miss dimitrescus, yeah sure u could say that he trespassed, same with moreau, but donna literally LURES HIM IN with hallucinations of his DEAD WIFE, then OPENS THE DOOR for him and TAKES HIM DOWN THE ELEVATOR

she is literally one of the people who ACTIVELY leads him to where she is

she also uses psychological puzzles , like making ethan perform surgery on a wooden doll of his wife and making him run away from a monster that cries like a baby and calls him "dada" 😭 she did not need to do any of that... like at all 😭 she did it because she wanted to 😭 she is by no means innocent at all

she toyed with him for literally no reason other than her own desire and then ethan doesnt even intentionally kill her. he is in a situation where is his trapped in the house and has to find angie, the doll, to avoid being attacked by dolls with like 100 knives stapled onto them

its only when he defeats angie its revealed that he had actually stabbed DONNA. he didnt even intentionally kill her 😭

then moreau... poor moreau... 😭

moreau in my opinion is one of the more sympathetic lords. whoever he was in his life pre cadou has no influence or impact on his life post cadou, the cadou just wrecked his brain functions

all he is is just mirandas minion at this point, he only wants to please her and doesnt really think about anything else for himself 😭

i dont have much to say about moreau because theres not really many people who woobfiy him or pay him any attention really 😭 though i will say he was very unabashedly evil 😭 he did horrible things, such as eating the fishermen and his experiments with the cadou on the villagers, he did it for mirandas approval but its not a excuse for it, hes still a villian 😭 now we are onto karl.... this guy... the woobification of him is insane 😭 first of all, something i dont see people acknowledge is that he actually HAS killed villagers! no he doesnt just use dead bodies (which btw isnt really a step up 😭 some of u set the bar too low man) the lycan gauntlet that he made ethan run through? yeah, he used that before! he has an entire PA system set up in it! he has lights and huge spikey metal death traps! he did not make all of that just for ethan just to "play appearances" for miranda. there were other people who went through that. and they DIED!

their deceased bodies are still in there! karl is messed up and eccentric 😭 it makes him fun, let him be messed up and evil 😭 and yes, karl used DEAD bodies instead of killing people who were alive, so surely that makes him far less evil right?

WRONG! 😭

HE CONSIDERED USING LIVE BODIES FOR THE SOLDATS 😭

karl really isnt a good person, he has reasons for the things he does, he wants to take down miranda and i dont think hed be creating undead zombies in the first place if it werent for her ruining his life but that isnt justification, its just an explanation for why he does what he does. he has a sympathetic back story and motives but you cant erase what he did, hes a villain! he tries to use a baby as a weapon!!! all 4 of the lords are villains, and instead of making other characters worse to uplift your favorite character that did something bad, you can just accept that the character you like did bad things 😭 they are all fictional, if i like moreau it does not mean i endorse eating fishermen 😭 you can like a character that is flawed, or evil, or did insanely messed up things because its RESIDENT EVIL. they are EVIL! they do bad things! like im sorry! but if your fave has a villains wiki it probably means they did some bad things! 😭

i wish people would be able to enjoy a character without entirely dismissing the bad things they did. its okay to like a character that does bad things, its ok to find them interesting and fun! but you cant deny what actually happens in games to try and make them appear as innocent. you dont have to justify every little thing that they do, just accept them as a whole!

of course this doesnt apply to AUs or just posting for fun. you can change media to be what you want to make it more fun. im going to draw lady dimitrescu treating ethan like a unwanted family pet. does that mean that i think she would really do that in canon? no! she would bite him and then tie him up like a pinata and give her daughters blindfolds and bats!

but people need to be able to recognize that fanon is NOT canon.

this post is about canon interpretations,

this is just addressing people who genuinely believe that those kinds of portrayals of the character is an ACCURATE portrayal, because its not.

[flightfoot]

You know, I started watching Miraculous about a year ago, binged the whole thing pretty quickly. Didn't bat an eyelash when watching Chameleon (it was actually an episode that made me like Adrien -more- lol, dunno if that's weird or rare?). Maybe because I had the advantage of seeing 5 seasons all at once, but Lila never bothered me much because she just... didn't come across like much of an actual threat? Anyways, the idea of being upset with Alya... never once crossed my mind. Adrien is my favorite, and I had already heard some of the saltier takes about him when first getting into the show. Since I was a new viewer, I wasn't sure how much of the salt to take seriously? And was feeling kinda frustrated about it. So honestly, my first reaction to hearing about Alya salt was almost...relief? Because I thought that if the fandom was mad at -her- of all people, I could ignore most, if not all, of the salt as just...bad faith interpretations, people getting angry to be angry. I mean this as a compliment to Alya's character, if that makes sense? She's like, one of the characters least deserving of salt IMO. Anyways sorry if this is confusing or pointless because it's just my (maybe in the minority?) opinion. And I don't mean to invalidate how frustrating all the excessive Alya salt is. But I guess I wanted to bring a little Alya positivity.

I can see what you mean about actually being kind of relieved about the Alya salt, because it's so clearly a bad faith take that most of the rest of the stuff in its vicinity loses validity as well. So you don't feel guilty for not agreeing with the awful things people are saying about the characters you like, because their opinions are bogus.

And yeah, honestly, Chameleon is actually a really GOOD showing from Adrien, when looking at what he actually knows. Seriously, this sweet boy:

Offers to change seats with Marinette so he gets sent to the back of the class instead of her.

Tries to talk Lila into stopping lying by just kindly telling her that she doesn't need to lie to make people like her, but that continuing to lie will turn people against her, and requesting that she not lie to him again.

Adrien advising Marinette against trying to continue to expose Lila. His presumption that she was just a lonely girl lying for attention was wrong but honestly his advice was pretty sound, especially since Marinette's attempts to expose Lila were just backfiring. And his statement about how making a bad guy suffer has never turned them into a good guy had a fair point to it. I have a feeling that Adrien doesn't approve of prison systems, considering that line.

I love that Adrien did, in fact, go back to sit with Marinette during the next class period so she wouldn't feel so isolated. He can't make Lila into a better person, but he can make her effects on Marinette less bad.

Like. Based off of what he knew and believed at the time, he conducted himself amazingly well. It's not like he could have reasonably anticipated how batshit whatever's going on with Lila is.

[purplink8]

I gotta admit, I kinda wish they'd shown more character development for Light in the beginning. It didn't convince me enough that "god complex" was a way with coping with the first two killings. IT CAME OUT IN FIVE DAYS. There was something else that made him like that and we never get to see it.

I don't buy it, and I honestly roll my eyes every time someone goes on and on about how Light was really such a good person and he was "traumatized" by the murders he "accidently" did, as if jumping through hoops with speculation requiring meta-analysis is necessary to properly understand him and is a more reasonable interpretation instead of just taking what he says at face value and reading what's plainly written on the damn page.

The whole process reminds me of how at the end Light, as a last ditch effort to save himself, goes on a giant multi page rant about how Kira was necessary and he was the only one who could do it, laboriously explaining his motivations....and Near very succinctly and correctly tears it down and distills the truth of it: "no, you're just a murderer."

Hm, I don't quite agree with you. I'd argue that there IS character development for Light (in the manga, at least) in the beginning as illustrated in these posts. As for "God complex" being a way to cope with his killings- I didn't say anything remotely close to that. Rather, Light copes by convincing himself that he's doing the world a favor by killing criminals and sacrificing his peace of mind imo.

The narrative Light feeds himself is that of a martyr about to die (he genuinely believes that he'd die before Ryuk's arrival) for his cause. Yet, this all changes when Ryuk comes, tells him that Light's destined to die at his hands, there's no heaven or hell, and last but not the least, that he dropped the Death Note because he was bored.

What are the things that stand out to Light? That if Ryuk decides that Light is boring, i.e., not interesting enough, he'll kill Light. Since there's no heaven or hell, Light now knows that he's got only one chance at his life, the length of which will be based on Ryuk's wishes. So he has to make the most of it.

Light starts by establishing that he is, in fact, interesting; hence, it would be a waste to kill him. He tells his story of using the Note, following the truth, except for the parts he leaves out. That, he had honestly thought he'd die for the sin of using a Death God's notebook, which is why, being an ambitious guy, he had mentally prepared himself to sacrifice his soul/life for the betterment of the world.

He fills the blanks in his motives for using the Note as in:

He was bored too (to bring forth a common ground with Ryuk),

He plans to become the God of the new world (which is infintely more entertaining than the truth (i.e., him covering up his fuck-ups (his first 2 kills) by intentionally fucking up more (killing with intent) AND him sacrificing his peace of mind and other people's life for the sake of making the world a better place).

Light starts seeing himself as an actual God (not in a religious way tho, he sees God as the position of absolute power) wayyyy after the first chapter, namely, chapter 55 of Volume 7:

So no, Light doesn't see himself as a God after just 5 days of getting the Death Note. It develops more gradually than that.

I'm honestly surprised that you don't think that accidentally killing 2 people is enough to change someone (Light) as a person. The situation is highly stressful, if not traumatic, for any individual to come out unscathed. I do personally believe Light was traumatized (anyone Not being traumatized by that would be an anomaly imo).

Light was a good person prior to finding the Note. I wouldn't exactly call him law-abiding (his hacking skills) but yeah. You can roll your eyes, I don't mind haha

The curtains were blue because of an underlying cause or not is a debate for a reason. I just find analyzing my favorite fictional characters fun and that's a hobby of mine so there you go. I will say however that if one takes Light's words at their face value, then one's understanding of Light wouldn't be very interesting (anime!Light I'm looking at you lol).

Idk I find reading what's written on the page and passively absorbing it without employing any of our critical thinking skills boring.

As for the warehouse scene, I agree with Near. Light is just a murderer. What's different from Light (a real person in that story) laying down his motivations and me (an irl person) explaining his (a fictional character's) motives is that I'm not trying to justify any of his actions. It's fun if we understand a fictional character's personality and why he behaves the way he behaves. I'm not being his apologist or anything haha

[findafight]

key reason why steve would be a better tutor than ppl like nancy or dustin tbh. esp nancy (given how prevalent nancy tutoring other characters is in fic),,,, whenever ppl talk about her tutoring steve or eddie or something i can't believe it bc ik she would get v frustrated w other ppl who are struggling w something she didn't personally struggle w. nancy would get v irritated if the tutee didn't understand something the same way she did and being able to explain something in multiple ways/look at something from multiple perspectives is literally number 1 most important skill for a tutor imo. god forbid if they were neurodivergent too r*nance shippers can lie to themselves all they like but it doesn't change how she acted w robin. genuinely think that those fics where nancy tutors eddie are subjecting eddie to his own personal brand of hell.

I JUST mentioned in the replies of that ask that Steve was a Lifeguard, and almost certainly was also teaching swimming. You have to be able to adapt how you teach something for that, not only because the age range is between babies and adults, but because people learn differently. You can't explain front glide to side glide the same way to a four year old as to a twelve year old as to a forty year old. it also requires spacial and physical awareness. Steve would probably understand that maybe he himself needs to repeat things back in his own words, and that others need to hear it again or write it down or something. I think he would only really succeed or even try in something he knew well and was confident in, hence swimming and the abundance of steve-helps-lucas-with-basketball headcanons. He's good at physicality, and that's a knowledge base the rest of the cast (except for lucas, now) seem to lag in.

Tbh i don't know if Nancy would be a terrible tutor, but yeah she would get annoyed and frustrated if whoever it was she was helping didn't learn in the same style she did. (and maybe take it personally? like maybe think it was on purpose or reflected badly on her, when they are just incompatible learning-wise) but she is very "My way or the highway" and stubborn, so I agree that she wouldn't want to or possibly not even think of adapting how she's coming at teaching it. Just personality wise Nancy is very smart but not exactly a teacher.

Ah. yeah. with robin i'm not sure how else to look at it other than Nancy being annoyed that robin was talking too much, worried about how Nancy saw her, and suggesting the conspiracy newspaper. People can have multiple interpretations I guess but as someone who is neurodivergent and doesn't pick up on a lot of that stuff in person except in hindsight or when pointed out to me, but can clock it in media, it really did strike me that way.

[cdroloisms]

I just came across your post about vagueposting and I think I agree with it, but the situation you most likely wrote it about is hardly a "vagueposting" because you could say who it was about after reading it literally one time and that person got jumped and insulted in the anon ask anyway so discussing it in person could be safer...

I'm reeeally sorry for bring up a past situation, but I don't think it's a good idea to write nasty things about another person and specific details about how they interact with the fandom and their post, say things that will help to easily identify a person and at the same time insult them or say how you think they feel about the characters or the story based on your feelings about their one take that you didn't like and then call it's "vague" because there is no name in the post. I mean, It can lead to bad consequences, it literally did in that situation.

And yes, I do think people have the right to discuss bad takes or takes they don't like, but there's a way to do it without giving away every detail about the post and the person who wrote it so everyone knows who you're talking about, and if you're not good at being vague, just discuss it in a private chat.

this ask is old but i was busy last week, so forgive me for the late response. i was debating answering it at all, but i dont want myself to be misunderstood, so just. to clarify under the cut.

i'll agree with you that the post/situation in question wasn't vagueing. now, i don't know exactly the difference between the number of followers i have and the number of followers that the blogger in question has, and when it comes to the number of active dsmp followers i think both of us have even less of a clue. that being said, both of us frequent much of the same circles, so i think it's fair to say that many of my posts will end up being exposed to a very similar audience to his, and so therefore this response about the situation you're talking about will be just about as clearly traceable to a specific person as the post he made that started the situation in question. just as a general observation.

if i'm understanding your ask correctly, while vagueing a take is fine, the vague shouldn't be clearly identifiable if you're going to speak badly about it or disagree heavily. to which i have to ask what, specifically, is defined as clearly identifiable? i think most takes in this fandom can be pretty easily traced to a person, even if that person is not the only person that believes in that take--just as an example, c!tommy as a butterfly pinned behind glass was a take in response to the c!sam and c!dream stream after techno escaped, and grew to be a pretty prominent theme to the point of a zine being modeled after it, but i can also trace it to a pretty specific tumblr post with a name attached. i also think that that same statement probably isn't true for many fans who maybe joined later on in the fandom. i mean, i'm aware that i'm being pedantic here, i'm aware that the situation in question created conflict specifically due to it being within dreblr and in a space where multiple people would've seen both posts and felt ensuing awkwardness bc they know both people either on a personal or acquaintance level, but i mean the same applied ages ago whenever strategist-interpretation and trauma-interpretation c!dream apologists felt like going at it again on the dash.

in this scenario specifically, what made the situation clearly identifiable was the nature of the take that was being discussed. the main identifying detail was the take that the asker was asked about, imo, and i mean ... yeah i mean. most takes that haven't blown up pretty heavily do end up being tied to one or two people? i mean, staged finale is a take that can be tied to three people who argued in favor of it the most before the rest of dreblr got on board only in late 2021. i simply don't think that a take that maybe only one person has argued for (which, i dont remember the statistics of the take in this situation, so i dont remember how many notes it had or how many people in total may have expressed public agreement towards it, honestly) is exempt from discussion when it is posted in a meta or analysis space as an analytical piece, which i do think applies to this take from what i remember about it and how it was tagged.

and back to the discussion of what's acceptable as far as directly responding versus vagueing, i mean, a lot of the discussion i've had on my blog (abt discourse etiquette in General in meta spaces on dreblr moreso than this specific situation, largely bc i did want to avoid commenting on a situation that 1) i really had no business in and 2) i have reason to be biased about. the main reason why i'm talking abt it now is bc hopefully enough time has passed for feelings to be less fraught and bc i want to make certain thoughts of mine clear, in case they weren't clear enough in my original posts abt dreblr and whatever) revolves around both direct responses and vagueing having their reasons as well as pros and cons, and both will likely continue to exist in analysis spaces and generally i don't think it's productive to really comment on what people can or can't do on their own blogs. in this scenario, i don't think "vagueing about one specific person in a way that may be clearly identifiable to parts of their audience" is uniquely unacceptable? a direct response very clearly would make the person in question identifiable -- outside of how it's kind of impossible to make a post vagueing someone in a way where No One has Any Idea who you might be talking about without making the post like, incoherent inherently, if vagueing (not identifiable) is okay and directly responding (identifiable) is okay, then why is vagueing (identifiable) not okay?

now, i understand that any situation where the person in question might be identifiable, some people may take the open disagreement as permission to harass them. and obviously, harassment sucks. part of the whole point of opening up this conversation on my blog was bc i worry, with the way that a single conflict between dsmp opinions has kind of rippled through dreblr recently and the responses to this "situation," that an environment is being created with too much of a forced global consensus that punishes people for stepping out of the status quo in both opinions and behavior, which is obviously bad for the whole community, and was looking to voice some of that and have a conversation on solutions. and i understand that in this situation, a lot of your problem with the blogger has to do with his general attitude in discussing the take and his statements on the person who made it. now, i think you have every right to find his statements offensive and disagreeable and to unfollow and/or block him. that being said, i am not exactly a PR agent, and i want to reiterate that what people do on their own blogs isn't my business and i don't think it should be my business. or uh, anyone's business, for that matter. i don't think that everyone "in dreblr" is beholden to keeping to a certain person's standard for "acceptable" disagreement and "acceptable" sharing of their own opinions on their own blog as long as they're not inciting harassment, which entails, like, actively encouraging harm to happen yk. i mean, you can think that the blogger was being rude or an asshole and prefer to never see him again, that's fine. that's your prerogative. but i mean, i'm not gonna tell the guy how to interact with the fandom on his own blog, haha.

to be clear, im not telling you what you can or can't do on your own blog either. if you wanna make a post about how his posts contain harmful rhetoric, how he's an idiot, or how he's rude bc you disagree with his public posts on this situation or on the dsmp as a whole, i mean, i'm not gonna handwring over it and tell you that you're not allowed to do that. it's none of my business, and i like to think i'm not that hypocritical. and honestly, i think that in a space where we're talking about analysis, commenting on harmful rhetoric happens often and should happen often when it happens -- literally anyone can make an analysis post that has harmful rhetoric, and sure it's fiction and no one has to answer to the analysis police for making a bad analysis post, but i've also been in this space and seen enough truly mind-boggling amounts of parroting takes about torture that make people sound like CIA psyops to go "well saying that someone's analysis post contains harmful rhetoric is really rude" pfft. again, i'm not saying i'm immune to hypocrisy, but i've certainly malded enough times in public about the shit people have said in this fandom to take issue with that. now, getting a little less into the strictly-analysis side of things, i understand that insults like calling someone an idiot may not sit right with everyone, to which i say. block to your heart's content. but c'mon man i've called people idiots before i'm no saint 😭😅

anyway. i hope this clarified some things, anon. take issue with whatever and whoever you like, honestly, whether that's me, the person that i just not-vagued for the last however many words, etc etc -- again, your prerogative. and i agree, it's a shame the situation devolved into stuff like insults in both bloggers' inboxes when it really didn't have to be like that like. at all.

[robinpixels]

Have you ever thought about how much worse the dynamic between Beta and the Zeniths are, when you do up the timeline and realize she could be as young as fourteen/fifteen? In no way a developed socially adept child because she grew up with freaking holograms and had no positive physical contact?

If you ignore the age bit. Beta probably only knows physical touch through the Specters and maybe some robotics around the ship. The first time she has physical contact that’s nice isn’t even from Aloy. It’s from Varl. And then he gets brutalized and she has no one to hug her or pull her close because Aloy is also socially inept (and possibly 19/20). Zo is trying to deal with the loss of not only the guy she liked but her baby’s dad. The others aren’t even sure how to connect. Though Erend might cause he’s a sibling.

But just. Does anyone else realize how traumatized Beta actually is and how much worse it is for her?

Opinion or your own thoughts? Cause this has me very concerned for how Beta could be mentally for the next game.

oh hello!! haha, god its been so long since i've put my hzd/hfw thinking cap on but i love chattin' shop and opinions and i've a few to toss around

to start around my thoughts personally i've always interpreted beta from the time we know her to be about 18! not from any hard concrete evidence, so this is definitely not a correction, i just gleaned so from initial impressions and from a personal bias in my head how its quite poetic to me if Aloy were staring back at someone that could resemble a version of herself back when she first started her journey. Then lending to her personal frustration when said mirror doesn't in actuality resemble her (or Lis, in her view) at all. its even more devastating to me in this sense too 'cuz what she could have had as a 'childhood' is essentially already all gone. but yeah, long story short - while if i'm honest i don't think she's a child anymore, she is definitely very much so floundering and struggling in her young adulthood (i still stand by how she's depicted in False Negative, like that's just Her to me, Tessa u absolute wonder u).

god, ur probably right about her not having positive physical contact all this time - either violence or nothing up until the point she meets the GAIA squad. the concept of the bond beta and varl could have had always makes me SO sad to think about, it could have been so good, and personally it does frustrate me how they never leaned more into it to the detriment of both varl and beta. they could've had such a beautiful meaningful friendship (please pardon 'Ro is Annoyed at How Varl was Treated as a Character In-Story, Part Infinity, but this does touch upon it). It's undeniable she's been through a whole hell of a lot in that brief span of time she was on Earth and away from the Zeniths - the whole crew has, and as trauma does it's definitely gonna leave them all scrambling.

but in my wholesale opinion i gently pat ur head and assure you she will probably be alright at the end of the day! while FW was imo incredibly garbled in its delivery in places it does make clear that coming together to form a community to withhold against adversity is the goal here, and one everybody at Base recognizes and I feel are making great strides to get there! i have faith in this motley crew - Alva is Alva, bubbly and cooperative as ever; Kotallo's stoic but incredibly warm and well-meaning; Erend is Erend, he's always been good to his friends; Zo as an Utaru probably knows better than anyone the importance of community support and cooperation. as for Aloy i think she's taken that good bopping to the head in regards to learning to depend on people and letting people depend on her - she's got a lot of solitude issues herself as is to be expected but it really did warm me seeing how she's trying to get over them for the sake of everyone around her, and is enjoying finally leaning on that community too. my most precious babygirl. i'm very proud of her

i'm absolutely positive beta is in astoundingly good hands - they're all in astoundingly good hands w one another! it's been so cute to me how post game you can tell she's starting to heal and engage with others, just how the team had done before and after her. While absolutely I think they're all going to have their missteps and stresses and maybe a falling out here or there as they try and adjust, I honestly think the horizon series is at its core all about having compassion and care for your fellow man (albeit taking no shit from them at the same time) and the world you live in, so I doubt any of them will even accidentally leave Beta behind. she's got a sister, a mom, and a wholeass family now!! i adore how all the post-game content has been beta shyly but slowly but surely getting better, determined as she is to contribute the ways she can now.

hahaskdaflj; you were probably expecting an angstier response out of me and oh believe me i love the angst!! but i also have such a soft spot for when horizon goes all Indomitable Human Spirit on us it makes me go all gooey. i think the kids will be alright <3

on a funnier note to an extent i believe in beta precisely BECAUSE she's already a little unhinged. girl came in with the box already banged up and inherently fucked up. yeah miss beta 'let me just knock myself out cold and tear this implant directly out of my head that'll thwart em' sobeck will fit right alongside that hall of madness now known as Base GAIA she'll do just fine and dandy. i've gotten such a taste for unhinged sapphics lately and when horizon delivers it DELIVERS

[pink-strawberry-kissess]

tumblr keeps exposing me cuz every time i get a notification it says “your crush is at it again” “mind-blowing post from your crush. they’re a favorite of yours, we’ve noticed ❤️”

and i be like WHO tf IS MY CRUSH??? i don’t even have a crush, and i click and it’s you😐

is me drunk anon.

i’m not sure if you talked about this before. you may have, and i have a feeling you did. i just don’t remember, but what are your hcs/theories for Ada’s back story and how she became a merc? (maybe you might want to do them FAQ shit lmao, hehe just a suggestion because i understand it can quiet get a bit tiring answering repetitive questions)

let’s get very deep with this. let’s not glide the surface of the water. i do believe that she started at a very young age. maybe around 9 or 10. and for this whole mercenary thing to work? there is no way she went to public school. was Ada born in China then gained US citizenship, or born in the US? i hc Ada’s parents as immigrants FOR SURE. maybe her family came to the US to escape economic hardships in China? maybe her parents are US citizens but her grandparents are immigrants? i’m only saying this because i believe it’s canon information that Ada is Chinese-American (and honestly i don’t remember seeing where Vietnamese came from), so she can’t be Australian or Canadian lmao

i would go on but this question is for u and not for me lol

k bye (YOU DRINK WATER too FAWK 🫵😤 and eat a something. u need reminding too 🖐️😌)

"they're a favourite of yours," YOU HAVE OTHER FAVOURITES????? >:((((((

im jks dfjkbfdjkssdjkfbskf

HIHIii

sdjkfjskfjksbfs honestly i have answered lots of things and i keep forgetting to link them to my masterlist and im also lazy

OKAYOKAOKAYOKAY so i think the "Ada is Chinese/American" has been a huge misinterpretation based on that one "Ada Wong facts" vid from ink ribbon? the video states that she's Chinese-American and for some reason I think people interpreted that as she's half Chinese / Half white. (i've always interpreted it as just she is Chinese AND lives in America and has grown up partially in America.

also for some reason it seems like Ada (to me) is the only fully asian character because jill has always supposed to be half japanese and they just COMPLETELY got rid of that imo. i refuse to acknowledge that she's half japanese considering they just don't do anything alluding to the fact that she is. she's always been modelled after white models too.

And also a lot of sites including capcom just state that's Ada's "of Chinese descent" and don't specify anything else.

ALSO capcom FUCKED UP REAL BAD IMO by modeling her with a WHITE PERSON'S FACE. ada, a chinese woman, should've NEVER been modelled after a white person. i know that for a bit of damnation? courtenay taylor stated that they modelled it a bit after her because of her face/voice???? but i don't know if it was confirmed, it was just from an interview and she wasn't even sure herself

i think because we have no idea for her backstory and there's no canon backstory there's so much to go on for DDDD: i just have so many thoughts about what kind of life she could've had.

god i just reread this and im rambling a lot just a lot of YAPPING

okay uh

i don't really think she was born in the states tbh. i do think her parents were immigrants or at least she had something that made her go to the states. i like the idea of her having to at least grow up a bit in the states (particularly in her teens) and that's also why i think she doesn't have an accent.

also YEAH i do know a lot of people who have come over from china or some part of asia and they RARELY lose their accent if they come over in their 20s. (most people have defined vocab at this point and unless they actively try to lose their accent or change their vocab, it tends to stay kinda the same. their english will get better, but i've also known people that lost a lot of their english after leaving uni for example) i've only see people lose their accent/never develop one if they have lived in america for 15+ years or grew up for a lot of their childhood/teen years

i know that's confirmation bias lol but considering ada's always had perfect american english, i (personally) can not headcanon that she moved into the states in her 20s. i think that she could've been in the states by the time she's like 7-11.

i'm not a huge headcanon-er of ada having siblings (particularly younger siblings.) also it being the 70s, (if her family complied with the law) she should not/would not have younger siblings (look up "one child law" if you're confused) i can see her having a younger friend that she "wanted as a sister"

i can maybe see ada having an older sibling, but i also hc that her family (similarly to leon and the rest of the re cast lol) have all lost their families in their entirety. (also i KNOW that the "leon lost his entire family" thing hasn't ever really been confirmed, it's just heavily headcanoned)

also

ada is not a chinese name. WONG is, but ada isn't. i've struggled with this and trying to find a reason for this lol other than it just being a fake name. iirc ada is a german name (from it's origins)

NYWAYS SORRY FOR YAPPING

THAT'S MY SECRET, I'M ALWAYS DRINKING WATER

hehe i go eat something sweet hehe :3

[bthump]

How much do you think authorial intent matters in analyzing Berserk? Because I've seen your post on Charlotte and how you interpret her sex with Griffith as consensual because Miura usually does a good job portraying sexual trauma, and sex scene tropes in media are usually dodgy while being intended to be consensual. I always have a hard time with this way of thinking because it doesn't change what objectively happened in the scene.

I actually differentiate between authorial intent and narrative intent to an extent. To me narrative framing matters the most. What Miura may have intended can be important inasmuch as he successfully conveyed it in the story, but I don't think his word is the final word on the story itself. If he gave an interview where he said he intended X, but I think the story conveyed Y, then Y is more important to my interpretation of the story.

So to use the Charlotte sex scene as an example, the biggest reason I read it as consensual (if psychologically fucked up to an extent) is because that's the narrative function of the sex. A rape scene would have a different impact on the story. The sex scene furthers Charlotte's love for Griffith, to her it's a contrast to her father's subsequent attempted assault, Charlotte has no misgivings about it, and the king doesn't accuse Griffith of rape but of theft from him. If it was intended to be a rape scene, it would be essentially nonsensical as a story beat and a bigger failure of writing imo.

And yeah, in addition to that there's the greater media context where a lot of sex that should be rape is treated as consensual.

But yeah I get what you mean about having a hard time viewing things that way. I find the terms watsonian and doylist helpful when discussing stuff like this in fandom, where watsonian refers to discussing characters and events as though they really exist, as though characters have agency and lives and make decisions, and doylist refers to taking account of the fiction of the universe, the knowledge that it's written by someone who has a point to convey and might have biases and make mistakes.

So on a watsonian level you can't really argue that it isn't rape because Charlotte says no. If it happened in real life, it would be rape, the end.

But on a doylist level it doesn't fit the story, and there are better ways to interpret that scene to suit the overall narrative better, which we can understand based on the various context clues I mentioned above.

When I discuss stuff I'm usually doing it on a doylist level because that's just how I roll lol, I enjoy analysing media as a construct created by people attempting to convey a meaning. To me, characters/setting/plot/etc are first and foremost tools to futher that meaning. But a lot of fandom is really into the watsonian level, which makes sense because that's where headcanons and fanfiction thrives, and it's a lot of fun to explore and speculate about the characters as though they're real people with real psychologies, to explain away plot holes and bad writing with in-universe explanations, etc.

It's totally cool to prefer one over the other imo! But yeah I think it's always good to differentiate between those different types of analysis, because they're trying to accomplish very different things, and to be aware of what level you're interpreting the story on. I find that it's really easy to get into discussions where people just talk past each other because one person is discussing the story as a fictional construct and the other is discussing it as if it's a real event that happened. It's how you get arguments like ''the depiction of this character is sexist because she's naked for no reason except to titilate the het male audience' 'there's totally a reason though, it's because she breathes through her skin!' or whatever lol.

Thanks for the ask! I like getting the opportunity to explain where I'm coming from when it comes to meta.

[kouxaoba]

When did Kou and Aoba fall in love ?

I feel like this is the first question people ask themselves when they finish the series. I believe he was always in love with her, and I'd like to offer my interpretation based on different things that point to that. I'll be analyzing different events and interactions (mostly from the manga as I'm more familiar with it than the anime and well, because it's the source material).

The answer is in Wakaba's "do not take him away from me" : a person cannot be taken away by someone who does not want to be taken away. Wakaba here was already admitting that Kou liked Aoba and was acknowledging her as her rival for Koh's love. Her statement just doesn't make sense if she was confident Koh was as in love with her as she was with him.

Everyone always mentions how much Wakaba loved Koh but no one ever states Koh loved Wakaba. If the feelings were mutual, we would have more statements like "those two were so in love", but instead it's always "Wakaba loved him so much" or "Koh monopolized Wakaba". It doesn't make sense for the author to have the side characters constantly emphasize this point if the romantic love was mutual.

The closest Koh came to ever stating he loved Wakaba was in his conversation with Yuhei. Note that even this exchange starts with him saying "She was totally in love with me". Again, a strange way to talk about someone you loved that passed away. This is why Yuhei can't help but ask "were you in love, too ?".

The pause/silence followed by the "..." imo speaks volumes. Compare this to when Senda asks him if he likes Aoba and then he answers "yeah" straight away with no hesitation. And we know it's not a lie because he throws his pitch perfectly.

Back to the conversation with Yuhei, he follows Koh's answer by stating "dealing with you guys is tiring".

"You guys" here means Koh and Aoba. Again, it's little tidbits like these that jump out and make me question the author's intent. There is no reason for Yuhei to bring up Aoba and Koh in a conversation about Koh's love for Wakaba, unless being the perceptive character he is, he understood the hesitation in Koh's answer meant something else. Mind you, at this point in the story he hadn't spent that much time with them to fully grasp their complicated relationship, so imo this says a lot...

4. Koh and Aoba are the same : this is a statement that Ichiyo and Yuhei (the two most perceptives characters) kept repeating throughout the show. When Aoba admits that she has always "hated" him, we understand what she means is she always loved him. When Ichiyo says they are the same, it's not just in terms of personality but in terms of their feelings for each other. So if we believe Aoba love Koh from the beginning, so did he.

5. Their love/relationship is everlasting : during the flashback of them at the cemetery, they are seen fighting, throwing mud over two graves. The names on the grave are "Kudo" and "Takeda". Now I admit my Japanese is non-existent so take this with a grain of salt. But the "Ku" in Kudo means "long time, old, long-cherished" and the name Takeda is synonymous with hard work, resilience and determination, all things that remind us of our 2 protagonists, right ? I admit I could be reaching, but I can't help but feel like this isn't a coincidence, and it's the author telling us in a subtle way that these two hard-working people have been in love since the beginning.

The beauty of Cross Game though, is that Adachi Mitsuru wrote a very subtle work that is open to interpretation. I'm not claiming my interpretation is the only correct one btw, but I just love re-reading the manga because every single re-read I notice the dialogue, pauses may mean something else. At the end of the day it really doesn't matter when they fell in love just that they both love each other, probably "More Than Anyone in the World"... My heart flutters

[dingdongrumba]

re: KamuKoma vs KomaHina, I feel like that poll needs a third option because I agree with you that they are not the same but I disagree that they are different ships.

You mention that the dynamics are different but an important thing to note is that even within just KomaHina there are a lot of different dynamics? Ch 4 KomaHina is not the same as Ch 1 KomaHina is not the same as Ultimate Talent Development Plan AU KomaHina is not the same as Ch 3 KomaHina is not the same as post-canon KomaHina. KamuKoma imo is just another specific facet to this which is usually like... 'Despair KomaHina'.

Izuru is very open to interpretation and his relationship with Nagito is completely fanmade as they only interact twice in canon. Therefore it's possible to view them as different ships or not. My interpretation of Izuru is very based around how I see Hajime (which is also left somewhat open as Hajime is not as robustly developed as more intentionally complex characters like Nagito and Mikan), so that's how I feel. Idk.

Hmm, I don't disagree with your anon. It's true that komahina has different dynamics too, and many of them. But for me that just means it develops and grows as the characters do and different situations present themselves (which is how most relationships work anyway)

Kamukura for me is just a completely different character, I think even people that headcanon them as being one post-canon, they still make a differentiation between Hajime and Izuru. Hajime is a developed character and Izuru only has hints of a character, he's more of a plot device tbh. No offense to him, he's an interesting plot device, if a little underused in canon.

And, correct me if I'm wrong, but I think people ship them for very different reasons. Kamukura, at least as far as I can tell, is usually depicted as lacking emotion, if he's with Komaeda, he might show more interest in him or something, but it's a big contrast with Hajime who literally never stops having emotions lmao. Well, that's how I usually see him. It's also that I think Komaeda sees Izuru and Hajime in very different lights, and they in turn see Komaeda very differently.

They have different personalities, beliefs, morals, emotions, motivations, etc. They pretty much only share a body (sometimes depending on who you ask). So yeah, they're just completely different characters for me

[unleashthegoats]

Hey y'all! Loved the new episode, and wanted to chip in on one of the later points - videogames, especially in relation to the "Grey" Jedi concept. Knights of the Old Republic II really did some irreversible damage in that regard, as much as I love the game (though I prefer the first one). Kreia is one of the most central characters in regard to shifting morality debates in Star Wars (in universe and from fans alike) imo, and I'd honestly be super interested in hearing you three cover either or both of the games in the podcast, although I understand that's highly unlikely since none of you have played them. But she is extremely relevant to this topic because she preaches about neutrality and that there's more than just ~dogmatic thinkings of light and dark~, and your relationship with her suffers if you are kind and altruistic and get too rooted in the light side and she's like...one of *the* characters that kind of gets credited with developing a "grey" philosophy in-universe? But people always bring her up as if she's this great point of sensible consideration and not actually, as it turns out, a master manipulator trying to purge the Force from the galaxy (or something like that at least? It's been a while since my last playthrough lol) that lies to you all the time to get you to do what she wants (because she was so crazy bananas both the Jedi and the Sith said "no thank u :)" - well, with a bit more nuance but you get the gist). Really, it's a bit like people falling for Palpatine's anti-Jedi points all over how they talk about her philosophic arguments without bringing that up. But yeah, I thought you might be interested in that. Also, I think KotOR might be what people meant with being able to unlock Dark Side powers as a Light sider but you are absolutely correct that it's a mechanics vs story issue (especially since some powers are indeed alignment-locked AND making dark side choices does impact the character (apart from story, ending and relationships to your party members). It's a bit of a simplistic gimmick, of course, but the further you get into the Dark Side on the alignment, the more it's visible - sickly skin colour, cracks in the skin and flesh, your eyes change...stuff like that. I don't think using Dark Side powers actually pushes you further down the alignment, but the intent is obviously not for Light Siders to mix and match however they like).

Anyway, I'm so sorry for rambling on for so long, but I thought you (or someone, at least :D ) might appreciate that additional info. Keep up the good podcasting! :)

OUR FIRST ASK! I'm so glad you're enjoying the podcast, thank-you so much for listening to us ramble on for an hour once a month!

This is all really interesting! I've read a few metas about the Star Wars video games and the characters within them which is partly why I chose to briefly include them in the episode (and also because I am familiar with Jedi: Survivor which has its own "dark side" mechanic for the main character that was relevant to the discussion). Aside from Jedi: Survivor, I wasn't necessarily referencing any one specific video game, I assume it's probably a thing that's come up more than once.

As far as my reaction to Kreia goes, just based on your description of her, the idea of there being "too much light" just isn't how Lucas's own worldbuilding worked. It's clearly trying to hit on the idea of "balance" being equal amounts of light and dark usage, as opposed to balance being acknowledging darkness EXISTS (in yourself and in the universe) in order to keep yourself from acting on it. There just isn't a way to be "too light" or something like that, there's never "too much" kindness and compassion and selflessness in the world. In this sense, the video games are just going to fall into the same category as the rest of legends and EU stuff, in that they often just do their own thing based on their own interpretations of Star Wars, but it doesn't mean it actually fits with what Lucas himself was trying to get across about the philosophy of the Force and the Jedi in his own stories, and that's primarily what we're using as a base to discuss Star Wars from.

If any of us ends up playing KOTOR, we can certainly try to bring it up more often. I don't think we have any plans of doing more video game stuff currently, but if the KOTOR remake ever comes to pass, maybe I will!

-Mod Sugar

[mileven11forever]

hi! ive been seeing ur posts around a bit and just wanted to ask you a question which honestly isnt related to the show plot because even though i do ship byler i believe mileven is gonna be cannon because a suger mega mainstream show isnt likely to throw away their main ship for an unexpected gay ship which imo would make sense with all the queercoding and would just be sumn new but yknow its unlikely. so my wish for s5 is some serious and good growth for mileven as a couple but back to my question as i mentioned earlier there is quite a bit of queercoding and ig what u could call 'proof' and while i agree some of the byler proof thrown around are stretches and reaches most of it seems pretty plausible which does mean there is a chance that the people working on that show purposely put in those aspects and parallels but for what? (possible queerbait which ick!) and another thing with will and his love arc it seems kinda unfair ik its the 80s and in reality it wouldve matched wills situation but in the end it is a super popular fiction show in 2020s and it does have the liberty to provide some sort of solace to will like everyone else in the show gets some kind of romance but the tortured gay guy should be happy with the acceptance? kinda ouch and on topic of queer characters i personally think robin has one of the most beautiful coming out scenes in tv history but with vickie they did bad to her character like they have barely 5 mins of screen time tgther and theyre basically the same person w the brain and mouth parallel so impo the writers and show producers have sort of messed up with the queer characters(s5 could redeem everything but i have a feeling it rlly wont) plus i mean making will love mike was such a choice like he couldve like anyone else the show has time and time again had clear chances to just either not make will have a thing for mike or get him to confess and or move on and introduce a new guy for him and have a chance of a happy ending but they had to employ the overused gay guy loves his straight best friend trope and drag onto the last season where theres already the battle to the death going on so even if they do get a new guy there will be no satisfying development to their bond. and then practically use his feelings to encourage mike which is just cruel and is kinda harmful for many queer people like i remember just sobbing in my grandmas living room because how horrible that scene made me feel so i just want ur opnions on this as u seem like some1 passionate about the show and an ally. (sorry if its kinda long this my first time ever interacting w anyone on tumblr im rlly unsure how to go about these things)

Yeah, definitely, I think I understand what you mean. Queerbaiting sucks, but I don't personally think that's what this show is doing. I think a lot of the hints people are claiming as Byler evidence is just based on their interpretation, and not what the creators intended it to be seen as. We honestly can't know what they intended without them confirming it, so it's hard to know one way or the other. I don't believe a lot of the evidence for Byler personally, and it just doesn't make sense narratively for the show like you mentioned. I don't know, it's complicated. If anyone else wants to share their thoughts on this, feel free to leave them in the comments. :)

[alovelyburn]

It’s an old ask and can’t find it rn but just imo grifflotte is miserable. Griffith, even with all of his power, is again in a way “forced” to use his body and charms to achieve his goal, something we see quite a lot happening in his youth and being his big issue. He has everything that should allow him to actually make his dream come true, but he still needs to pay a prize for it. I’m not saying it’s the same as Gennon, but the theme is always there. Charlotte being happy is also not the best? Like, I think it’s mostly narrative fault and the way women are presented in the story, but it is so sad. She is happy because she is manipulated into that happiness and lives through fantasy of some kind. And I hate how it can be interpreted as positive. And I do think theres a big chance we gonna see a child too, but I hate the idea of that kid inheriting Griffith kingdom and being destined to rule it, without the baggage (quite popular theory in normal side of the fandom) instead of an actual princess with good ideas who should already have much more growth tbh. It’s like her character ultimately gets turned into just incubator for the next cycle. Not the worst fate in berserk but I hate it so much. Women in berserk are better-ish than most characters we used to but that don’t make them good. But hey, that’s just me wanting more

All right, I think I get where you're coming from now. It's just not how my head works, so I had to kind of adjust my perspective a little. When someone says a relationship is miserable my assumption is that they mean the characters are miserable, but it seems more like commentary on the type of relationship it is. Sort of similar to the child/heir thing - less about the story supporting it than that you perhaps find the turn unsatisfying or undesirable from the perspective of what you'd rather see. I might still be off base, feel free to correct me. But yeah, I mean I'm not here to argue with people's preferences, it is what it is.

From my own perspective...

I do think Griffith pre-eclipse seemed to perceive his relationship with Charlotte as being in the same vein (not to the same degree) as his encounter with Gennon in the sense that he was once again "paying" for something he needed by trading his... body (and the performance of affection in Charlotte's case) for that thing. I think this is part of the reason for his post-coital breakdown with her - this sense that he had lost someone he loved and wanted and is now left with this person that he will always feel he is "selling" himself to on some level.

Honestly, even allowing the Godhand to destroy the remnants of his human flesh and carve his heart out in exchange for his ascension is in some ways just the extreme end of what he's always done: giving away pieces of himself in exchange for things he needs in order to accomplish his goals. Even the external sacrifice is described as needing to be something that is essentially so loved as to become a part of the person making the sacrifice.

"Take hold of the world in exchange for their own flesh and blood," as they say.

And I do think that is incredibly tragic - he's a tragic character. Absolutely. I'm just not sure whether that's something Griffith cares about at all post-eclipse due to the destruction and reconstruction of his emotional world.

Anyway, I'm of two minds about the whole thing because... I've written at some length about my frustration with Casca, the way her character is constructed and the motivations she's given. Yet, at the same time, if I think about what could/should happen with her character, I can only do that from the reality of what she is in the story rather than a hypothetical about what I would have made her or would have preferred her to be.

Plus my writer brain is stronger than my fan brain, so when I think about things like this I always think about them as being one of many moving parts within a narrative. So I think things like, if Charlotte were the sort of character to take over like a boss after her father passed away then the whole story about Griffith courting her so he can run a country makes no sense. That being the case, she's designed to be a person who doesn't do that because... that's just the role she has in the story.

All that said, and now I'm just continuing to talk about this grifflote child concept as though I'm invested in it and I just akjnakjnsd like I'm REALLY NOT I'm just thinking from a narrative perspective since it keeps coming up...

Let's say she has a kid, and then Griffith dies.

The kid would be like... an infant. So wouldn't she need to step up anyway?

ETA: And I have no idea what the mainstream western fandom is doing aside from performatively spitting fire every time Griffith's name is mentioned. Still, they can't be wrong all the time. Stopped clocks and all that.

[jackienautism]

fave moments from the beta pt 1 bc i had to split it in half for tumblr's sake. ranges from parts i find funny to parts i find interesting to parts i feel are crucial to a character's development / characterization

all clips uploaded by digital preservation on youtube

reasoning as to why i included clips under cut:

1: HELLACIOUS? WHAT?

2: i like how jess floats for a sec

3: sam in the beta is just so much .... different than what we got dfjkgfg and i honestly think thats more of a good thing. there are just times where im like ...... wow. the current game's sam would NEVER say that. or maybe she would! i dont know! but in my interpretation of sam, she wouldn't call emily a bitch literally to her face jkdfgfjg i was SO shocked hearing her say that the first time i watched chapter 2. if anything, i can see her being cruel and shit behind people's backs....similar to what emmamountebank has talked abt in terms of sam's potential flaws... so im interested that they sort of played into that theory in the beta. but imo i just. i can't see sam being MEAN yk? yeah sure she can be sarcastic and shit but downright rude? i just... i can't see it. not after everyuthing she's gone through. and it seems like in the beta sam wasnt meant to be hannah's best friend? i could absolutely be wrong though.

i like how this already establishes emily and jess' "rivalry," meaning you dont need to wait for the lodge fight to occur. which seems to happen regardless in this version of the beta. plus based on this version's intro / prologue, their past friendship wasn't established. so that's one thing im definitely glad they added to today's game

EATING UP HOW EMILY CALLS SAM SWEETIE LOL prob more so done in a derogatory sense here but she also calls matt sweetie later soooooooo

ALSO I LIKE HOW THIS SCENES SETS UP FOR EMILY + SAM DISCOVERING JESS' BODY IN THE MINES..... ITS A TOTAL CONTRAST TO THIS MOMENT AT THE BEGINNING OF THE GAME

4: once again!!! sam's being so mean!!!!!! sjfksdfb LIKE CHRIST..... adn idk abt everyone else butin the beta it really like...... nicely shows the rift in the group? like. it demonstrates the group's dynamic w/ each other veeeery well. and most of it isn't really positive dfkjgfdg its like theyre all putting up an act... which is def realistic (i see it everyday at work) but it's just..... it's sad. bc theyre meant to be an established friend group right? maybe in this version of the game they wouldve dove deeper into how the night hannah + beth disappeared rly affected everyone... sam being mean is def interesting but if they stuck w/ this sam i honestly dont think i would've gotten AS attached to her.

as i just talked about with jess / emily, its interesting seeing these moments between em and sam bc! look at how they get along and work together later in the game! it's so cool to me

5: LOVE HOW ASHLEY JUST. WHOOOSH

6: interesint insight into both hannah and beth. something i wouldn't have known playing the game we have today

7: liked how it showed the dynamic between chris and josh... also love how josh says "THANK YOU CHRIS"

8: FAVE. I LOVE YOU JESS. SOMETHING ME AND BROTHER WOULD SAY TO EACHOTHER FR also love how she says "thank you!"

9: i love jess' dumb lines so much jess riley i love you

10: he's right though. why the fuck would there be a photo of the keys just sitting there

11: I LOVE WHAT THEY DID W/ BETA EMILY SOOOOO MUCH. I LIKE HOW THEY INCLUDED MORE OF THESE MOMENTS TO SYMPATHIZE AND SHIT W/ HER..... plus it rly adds to her character and whatnot! em seems soooo much less bitchy in this version. i wonder whatmade them change :/

12: ok 1. why was matt about to tell a joke dfklgnfg i kind of want to hear it now and 2. love how em is just "you are NOT making me feel safe rn" also i rly enjoy their banter... its so much more of them actually having a conversation and talking rather than em being MEan. still wondering why thye decided to make em so mean in todays version

13: em dfkgndfg you are so ridiculous. i love emily's dumbass lines in the beta

14: wasnt expecting the minecarts to come from that way. emily almost got HIT

15: that's usually what bite marks mean yes emily<3

16: i just like how chris says that dgnkfg

17: self explanatory. id be pretty terrified too seeing a man w/ white eyes t posing at me like that

18: WHO TALKS LIKE THIS!!!! EMILY I LOVE YOU

19: I ALWAYS LOSE IT AT THE "HEE HAW!" DLKFGNKDJBG

20: i LOVE how chris sounds so much more..... scared. for josh. and how he sounds so. like just. all around scared. and the line about them leaving him out there would just be like them killing him themselves is sooo good. it's so much more than the stupid ass "im supposed to be his best friend!" bullshit. this scene is just so much better. it shows how much more chris cares

21: him mentiuoing that cartoon thing is so funny to me fdjkgdfjg

22: same thing as 20 pretty much!

there were a few things i wanted to add from chapter 4 but for whatever reason it wouldn't let me download the video ):

[anghraine]

kazaera replied to this post:

I hear you - I feel like the, mm, density + lack of detail of the source material makes it really easy for someone's interpretation to proliferate until people treat it as equivalent to canon. (my favourite example of this is Círdan fostering Gil-galad - entirely fanon, Tolkien wrote no such thing). IMO one of the most fun parts of writing Silm fic is how many different spins you can put on events! It always makes me sad when we get super narrow here.

Yes! I often do get annoyed or frustrated by the way that specific interpretations get treated as canon and spread, when there are all kinds of different permutations possible (like Maglor as Elrond's and Elros's "adoptive dad", which is by no means the only possible interpretation of their dynamic, but widely treated as canon even by people who are sharply critical of Maglor).

It's also one of the reasons I tend to be so annoyed with fans of certain adaptations or expanded universes jumping down my throat every time I break with adaptation-derived fanon or some transient expanded universe thing (usually overwritten in a few years, anyway). It's like ... going against the fandom grain isn't actually forbidden. We're allowed to fill in gaps ourselves and different people coming up with different ideas is where a lot of the fun of fandom comes from.

Though, all of that said, that annoyance is of a very different flavor than my annoyance with the dudebros insisting that any conception of Galadriel that includes anything not stated by Tolkien is woke OOC Mary Sue blahblahblah.

and yeah, why the hell WOULDN’T Galadriel have known how to use a sword? There’s also an element of “so Tolkien didn’t say so explicitly but what do you think is _plausible_ given the context and the bounds of his world.” like, do you think Galadriel is flinging around fireballs? In Tolkien, magic used in combat tends to be like… Sauron vs Finrod, more a duel of wills. I don’t think Galadriel was singing at Alqualondë, y'know?

Right! The idea that it's just wildly OOC for a physically imposing, athletic woman who joined a battle definitely involving weapons to know how to lift a sword is absurd to me. I do think "is this plausible based on what we do know otherwise" makes for a much more productive line of reasoning. And thinking critically means that not every statement that can be quoted from a source is necessarily accurate—it depends on the viewpoint or biases of the characters, too! And then there are Tolkien's statements outside the narratives that may or may not be taken as "canonical", depending.

So this very binary idea of canon facts as "thing stated somewhere in canon" vs "thing not stated in canon, regardless of how probable it is or isn't" just seems very superficial and flawed to me.