#canon here often meaning 'the canon of this text' and not necessarily that it's canon in that loosey goosey way hs treats canon

[crazyexdirkfriend]

homestuck has always been a character driven story, though. you can’t expect people to automatically be chill with characters suddenly representing a more thematic purpose when, up until that point, homestuck has largely been mostly a series of character studies. as if in order to have a characters story be thematic you can’t keep their characterization in tact. presenting critique of the epilogues as if it’s just people being upset their faves didn’t get happy endings or the right characters didn’t kiss is. super disingenuous. they’re just badly written man.

Hi! So, Homestuck is obviously character driven in many ways because it has a metric shit ton of characters (there's bound to be one or a set that appeal to everyone) and the characters are the heart of the story. For most people, engaging and interesting characters are why they read a story. And that's absolutely fine- but it doesn't mean every story is written that way, and every other manner of writing or reading story is incorrect or bad.

So you don't like the epilogues. That's absolutely fair! There's plenty of reasons to not like the epilogues-- such as how it was handled by staff, or elements that were offensive or improperly tagged. But I would like to say that's clearly not what I'm talking about. I'm talking specifically about a not HS-specific notion that character supersedes theme. (You know, like modernised myths that completely ruin the actual meaning of the original text because no attention was paid to theme or purpose)

Like I said, I'm posing a question in order for you to critically examine why. Is it that X, or is it that Y. And you know- it's perfectly fine for you to critically examine your feelings and still go "yeah no canon sucks, I could do it better." Because some people could do better- and sometimes canon sucks. For example, I personally have decided that HS2 canon DOES actually just suck for naming that poor child THAT.

But some people will critically examine why they hate something and think "Actually, Hussie doesn't hate Jake. Jake is a fictional character and I don't like what happened to him, but that doesn't mean that Hussie baited us into liking him and then deliberately gave him a shitty story because he hates Jake and he hates us too." (If anything, I would argue that narrative manipulation points to Hussie baiting people to DISLIKE Jake to bait and switch them, but that's another story.)

And I'm not sitting here saying "the epilogues are perfect and great and everyone who hates them is or thinks they're bad is wrong." I'm not self centered enough to believe that when over half the fandom had a mass exodus after the release and I probably would have joined them if my circumstances at the time were different. The epilogues are a desperately unpleasant read, one I very much struggle with every time I have to reread parts of them before writing something new. Like I said, most people read stories for characters or interesting plots, and it is desperately unpleasant for your favourite character to become a pseudo-philandering self-harming alcoholic who is sexually assaulted and domestically abused and is forced to defecate himself on stage. That's not what I would have written. But, I also don't view it as out of character.

BUT, I do think it's not the right take either to think that HS hasn't always been thematic, deconstruction of the nature of form, playing with narrative manipulation. HS breaks the fourth wall, uses intertextuality, epic narrative form, breaking the actual structure of the website, gameplay, animation etc etc etc. All of those things were so important in making HS what it was. My OG thesis pitch was on narrative manipulation in HS back in 2017-- literally not dissimilar at all to narrative text as God and how that manipulates a reader discussions in the epilogues. Academic journals have been written on how HS uses form to tell its own story. All of those things are as fundamental to HS in my opinion as the idea that it's a story about kids and growing up. The latter is the reason why we LOVE HS. But the former is the reason why it's so important as a seminal text. There's any amount of great stories about kids and growing up-- but they're not HS.

HS could have never had a continuation beyond opening the door unless Hussie wanted to deconstruct the form and the narrative itself, and the concept of endings. HS as a web comic structure in a liminal space ends when the door is open. Now, a very good argument can be made here for "ok then there shouldn't have been an epilogue." I actually don't disagree with that. I think one of the best things Hussie could have done would have been to allow a few more lilypad conversations and have HS finish dead the second the door opens. But it didn't-- and HS could have never had a happy, neat epilogue and have everyone agree on a vision.

On the subject about HS being a story about kids and growing up, HS also says real people don't have character arcs. It's a pretty clear reason as to why everything wasn't tied up neatly at the end of HS proper, and it's a pretty clear reason for most of the epilogues. Recovery isn't linear. Sometimes people grow up wrong. Real people don't have character arcs.

We think of story largely in character arcs so we think-- Dirk always wanted to be a good person, so his arc should be him becoming a good person. Not that Dirk tries so so so hard to be a good person, so hard and it still doesn't make him happy. It still doesn't get him where he wants to be. He's never ever going to be good enough to feel redeemed-- oh and btw, he's literally in a story that's ending, it's falling apart, and he's so so so scared to not exist. He's more scared of that than he is of being a bad person. Is that desperately unpleasant? Of course. Is it out of character? No. It's just not what anyone focusing on a solely character driven story would necessarily do. It requires deconstructing the narrative and then going, what would this guy do next now. Character and theme and narrative and form all have a symbiotic relationship. It's meat and candy.

HS isn't just character driven. But that's just what most of us (MYSELF INCLUDED) care about. And that's not wrong, that's not bad, that's not some terrible flaw in recognising one's self in the other. In fact it's the logical reading of a text you love. But you actually miss a huge chunk of what makes HS so special if you're only looking at the characters and their interactions and arcs. You miss a lot of what makes a lot of stories so interesting. It also makes it a lot harder to not become disillusioned when stories get difficult or disappointing or unpleasant. But I wouldn't still be here if I didn't think parts of recent HS were worth investigating and analysing.

(Also just for transparency: my original post wasn't actually about the epilogues, though considering my subsequent and previous post I entirely understand that it's been read that way. I saw art on my dash by a meta poster I remember from 2018 who got a lot of stick at the time for thematic analysis. Including from myself. And I was considering whether or not that was unfair. Because a character can thematically represent something that they are not, in actuality. Things can happen to a character that represent something else. Freudian analysis if you will. And if I wasn't caught up in being outraged that he'd said something sticky about one of my favourite characters, something that did not happen in the text, then maybe I would have been able to engage with it on a more in depth level. And I annoyingly missed the opportunity to investigate it in my HS thesis in 2019 because of my own hubris.)

Anyway I'm a realish person and I don't have a character arc but I do grow up in weird ways that would make younger me desperately uncomfortable. I think that's a theme in itself.

[adragonsfriend]

There are no trash takes on Jedi philosophy, there is contextual analysis.

As may be obvious from the title (humorous--I have gone through several common misinterpretations myself), this is about that infamous scrap of poetry,

There is no emotion, there is peace. There is no ignorance, there is knowledge. There is no passion, there is serenity. There is no chaos, there is harmony. There is no death, there is the Force.

And the other version,

Emotion, yet peace. Ignorance, yet knowledge. Passion, yet serenity. Chaos, yet harmony. Death, yet the Force.

I've seen quite a few interpretations of these along the lines of "the second version is reasonable but the first version is crazy and stupid," so here's why I think both versions are actually communicating the same idea, and the wording doesn't really change the meaning much at all.

So just like I did in my post about "do or do not there is not try," let's start by asking some questions to establish context before we look at the text itself.

Is it THE Jedi Code or just a mantra? Legends says it's the Code, canon says it's a mantra. The fact of the matter is that no matter what, it's really a scrap of poetry which couldn't encompass the entire philosophical basis of a culture even if it was trying, so we'll consider it a mantra.

Does the fact that it's a mantra rather than THE Jedi Code mean that we can't get anything deep or meaningful out of it? Of course not. Just because it's not the whole of or a full explanation of Jedi philosophy doesn't mean it's just a nice sounding string of words.

Who is saying this to who? This mantra is often used to focus a meditation, with the first phrasing used by adults in the culture, while the second phrasing is more often used by children.

What were George Lucas' inspirations for Jedi culture that relate to this mantra? (borrowing from this post) A combination of christianity, buddhism, and his interpretations. I'm not an expert in any religion, and definitely not in buddhism, but I know enough to know I'm about to make some sweeping generalizations, so take this with a grain of salt. Disclaimers aside, this mantra, and the way it is phrased, indicate it is being inspired more by buddhism. The way christian texts, specifically the Bible, are written typically goes "here is a story about people doing something, and here is how big G god and/or Jesus reacted." There are metaphors sprinkled in, but they are mainly there to clarify for readers. Buddhist texts on the other hand (and lots of other eastern belief systems as well, like daoism, hinduism, etc. It's an important note that these belief systems don't necessarily conform to the western idea of what a religion is, and often their original languages don't even have a word which is equivalent in meaning to "religion") use metaphor in often deliberately contradictory ways, to make the reader think about things which are difficult to express in words alone. The ongoing struggle to reconcile contradictory descriptions is the point. This doesn't mean those texts can be interpreted however a reader would like. There may be multiple right interpretations, but there can also be wrong interpretations.

What the mantra does NOT mean:

"There is no ___ …" =/= "The experience of ___ is fake news."

"There is no ___ …" =/= "___ is not a useful concept."

"There is no ___ …" =/= "We should totally ignore ___ and pretend we've never heard that word before."

The mantra is not realy a set of advice on how to act. It's a set of statements about Existance. And I do mean capital E, philosophical, epistemological, weird, deep, think-y, Existence.

Temperature Metaphor

You know the first time someone tells you as a kid that cold isn't real, it's just the absence of heat and you're like… "but I'm touching something right now and it feels cold???" It sounds wild the first time you hear it, but as you think about it more, maybe learn about it a second time in science class, get some more context about how molecules work, etc. it begins to make more sense. It gets easier to grasp, until eventually the knowledge feels intuitive--especially if you're a STEM person who thinks about it a lot. We still talk about cold as a concept, because it's useful to us as well--lack of heat can have damaging effects on our bodies after all, and a cold drink is great on a hot day--and it's more efficient to say "cold" than it is to say "lack of heat." But there are some situations, like developing refrigeration or air conditioning, where it is not just useful but essential to think of temperature as it really is--heat exists, cold doesn't--and thinking of it colloquially can only hold us back (if this isn't actually intuitive to you, that's fine, it's just a metaphor--you could also think about dark being the absence of light, vacuum being the absence of mass, any number of things mirror this).

Probably the easiest like to get one's head around, imo at least, is "there is no ignorance, there is knowledge."

Taken hyper-literally it would mean "why seek out knowledge ever when everyone already knows everything?" But if we say knowledge is to heat as ignorance is to cold, then we can understand the real meaning--knowledge is real, where ignorance is only the name of an experience.

The Whole Mantra

This is the way the Jedi are understanding of emotion, ignorance, passion, chaos, death, etc. They are introduced, as children, to the idea that whilst they may feel all of these things, what they are actually experiencing is the lack of the other things--peace, knowledge, serenity, harmony, the Force. That's why they start with the "___ yet ___" phrasing--it introduces them to the first steps of understanding:

They can feel emotions, yet peace is still real and out there to reach for no matter how overwhelming those emotions may be at the moment,

They can feel ignorant or unknowledgeable, yet knowledge is out there to find,

They can experience passion (meaning suffering or pain in this context), yet know that serenity will return to them,

They can find their surroundings chaotic, and yet look for the harmony in the noise,

They can understand that death happens, yet be comforted by the fact that the person dying is still as much a part of the Force as they ever were.

Eventually they move onto the full mantra:

They will always feel emotions, but if they always reckon with those emotions and pass through them they can always return to a place of peace,

If they feel ignorant, they must seek out knowledge, rather than acting rashly. Also, their own knowledge is not the limit--others may hold knowledge in places they consider clouded,

They may experience suffering and pain--it may even feel like a good thing--but there is no wisdom in pain, it is the distraction from serenity, which is where truth can be found,

No matter how chaotic the world appears, it is actually a part of an underlying harmony that makes up all the patterns and the beauty in the world,

Death is not an ending, no matter how much it may look like one. It is a natural transition back into the Force, the place all life comes from.

A Jedi youngling is someone for whom this understanding is an essential part of the culture they are being brought up in.

A Jedi Padawan is someone who is beginning to learn to apply this understanding outside the confines of the Jedi temple, in a world where not everyone shares it.

A Jedi Knight is someone who has learned to apply this understanding on their own, without supervision.

A Jedi Master is someone for whom this understanding has become intuitive and automatic, no matter their surroundings.

All this is to say,

[somethingpersonarelated]

On simplifying Akechi

My brain was ridden with these ideas people have about Akechi that piss me off a little. Mostly ones that say he is "just crazy" or "just hates Joker." There's countless metaposts countering these arguments (and they are absolutely wonderful) but I often wonder WHY simplifying Akechi down is so appealing, even to people who are fans of his character. I can't say I've never been immune to simplifications of his character either, and I feel like that's important to admit. I don't even think it's necessarily a bad thing, but I was wondering about that why question.

TW: Discussions of mental health and child abuse

Source: A high schooler's holiday from the P5 Comic Anthology (read it here!)

I do think it's hard for all of the little things Akechi's character builds upon to be conveyed through a single playthrough. If you go in blind or don't finish his confidant, you may only get that surface level exploration of his character. Base Akechi is flashy and still gets the point across that it needs to: he's a foil to Joker and the PTs. However, by missing out on his social links and special events, you miss cultural, relationship, and personal context.

Many words have been said about the translation, particularly in the engine room, being faulty in areas. But some people still don't understand that Akechi's plan isn't to kill Shido, even when the text makes that clear. There's also this scene with Shido, which reads more as an exposition dump in a long section of the game most players will either tune out or skip. Not everything you see will always stick in your head, and Persona is a LONG game. I feel like it's easy to forget people just... forget canon sometimes. It's easier to put these details aside and say Akechi isn't affected by the system he's raised in. But the reality is, you miss what Lavenza says about Akechi's role, you miss that one exposition scene, and you miss the confidant: you believe Akechi had much more autonomy than was actually true. In conversations I've had with people IRL about Persona, 2/3 either skipped or did not finish Akechi's confidant. It isn't improbable, playtimes can range from 100-300 hours, most playthroughs take weeks. People will forget things. It isn't a maybe, it WILL happen.

When the game feeds you so much information, it's also easier to take what the characters say at face value. Doing this with Akechi will bite your ass. Those words in Rank 8 are directly expanded upon in No More What Ifs, the engine room, and 2/2. Maruki and Morgana confirm Akechi doesn't hate Joker, but you never hear Akechi say it himself. To me the game beats you over the head with this information (as the game has a tendency to do for certain situations), but I've also been in the rabbit hole for over a year now.

There's also this idea that recognizing that Akechi was set up by Yaldabaoth, his upbringing, and Shido means that all the venom is taken away from his actions. That isn't true, and Akechi holds to that in third semester. He doesn't give himself any grace for the situation he landed in, wanting to take accountability for it when it is undone without his consent. Akechi is by no means a perfect victim, and he doesn't believe that either. Recognizing that he had no choice, it was either homelessness and neglect or the plan he conjured himself only brings to light the tragedy of his situation, not whether his actions were morally incorrect. He wanted his father to be in his life, and he wanted his father to suffer. He wanted to have someone like Ren in his life, and he couldn't have someone like Ren because his plan would be jeopardized. It's a series of choices, some of which are forced upon him, some of which he chooses himself. That is an important distinction to make.

There's also this idea that Akechi is 'just crazy,' or never suffered from abuse or events that affected him long term. That he doesn't suffer from unspecified mental health conditions or trauma, and chose everything with a clear mind. When someone brings up this argument, it's usually in response to people talking about his life experiences. That somehow, the existence of trauma or a condition is an excuse for whatever he did. There's a double standard here: Akechi is someone who suffers from a condition that makes him 'plain crazy', simplifying his entire motivation and role in the story, while also removing him from the context of his mother, Shido, and his experience with the foster system. Actually interacting with these facets of his character brings to light the challenging things the story asks you to think about when it comes to Akechi: Is he a victim? Is he like the Phantom Thieves? What about his situation informed his choices? Interacting with this requires effort and an actual acknowledgement about what it means to be someone that suffers from trauma. Calling him 'plain crazy' not only is in disservice of textual analysis, but more importantly incorrect (and frankly, it falls straight into ableist tropes about mental health).

Sometimes internet debates/discourse lead to simplification, even just random headcanons may lead to simplification. That isn't always bad. There are many ways to say what I said here in fewer words. I, unfortunately, am not skilled enough to do that. But some of these simplifications lead to entirely incorrect judgements about a character, or even about mental health issues. When that happens, I wish people would learn to reflect about what that means when they interact with a piece of media. Or even with other people.

tldr: people should learn to say they just don't like things instead of coming up with excuses that make no sense. basically

[whinlatter]

sorry if you've discussed this before, but do you think ginny's quidditch talent came out of nowhere? it's a common criticism I see about her but I feel like that kind of overstates how much of a quidditch "star" she was at the beginning, like she was consistently described as good but not great until partway into hbp and I also think it makes sense she'd keep it a secret from her teasing brothers. but maybe they're right and I'm just biased towards defending ginny

thank you for the question, anon!

the short answer is - no, i think it's (just about) plausibly rendered in the books. i think the series gets away with it because:

the story is told from the perspective of a teenage boy aka peak obliviousness in corporeal form, so we see what harry sees (and harry notices big fat nothing)

there is an entirely adequate narrative explanation for ginny's sporting skills that most readers not operating in bad faith* can put together, as you suggest: ginny comes from a sporty family who are all good at quidditch; she is of middling-to-good seeking ability when she first joins the team in ootp; she then has a good few months flying several times a week where she would necessarily grow in confidence and experience, leaving her perfectly able to blossom in hbp in a high school sport where she is competing against other children. fine and dandy in my book.

also quidditch is a broadly dumb and pointless plot so ginny being good at it is just a fun extra that we don't need to deep too much because - let's be real - quidditch is a waste of page space.

*i say this because, most of the time, these takes come from those who don't like hinny as a pairing. which is entirely their right and prerogative! it personally doesn't float my boat to spend my days doing worst faith readings of the text in order to make the case against canon ships i don't like, but as this is a race to the bottom - we are all adults dissecting children's books written by a nasty spiteful woman rotting in her mouldy castle spouting slurs, after all - who am i to judge.

(i also suspect the 'ginny is good at quidditch out of nowhere' takes have enjoyed such a long shelf-life on eg. reddit because the films are still most people's primary reference for HP takes so complaints about them then get cast back on the books - and, in the films, ginny does in fact rock up in film 6 like she's mbappé, if mbappé had the charisma of an extraordinarily soggy bath mat.)

with that said... could it have done with a bit more foreshadowing? yes, probably. people who don't like hinny as a pairing and prefer another are never going to be convinced - that's fine! but here i am, a paid-up hinny supporter, and even i think ginny's character development is sometimes wanting, to a frustrating and problematic extent. good writing (usually) means showing not telling, and it's weird and lazy of jkr to be so slapdash about revealing this and other character details about ginny and other (often female) characters. i think it's particularly striking that jkr underserves characters (again, usually women) who exist to serve the emotional development of characters (usually men), rather than the mystery plot(s) that drive hp as a series. (wanted! tonks' personality! last seen making fake pig noses and being the only auror mad eye moody mentored as his successor, for no plot reason!)

while i'm not a die-hard adherent to the chekhov's gun principle, i think one of the strengths of many novels du jour - especially the nothing really happens postmodern novel that crowds the bookshop shelves these days - is that their conventions allow authors to add colour to characters without each tiny detail being pregnant with meaning and in service of a driving plot that must be marched forward at all times. that can be really nice! as readers, we like to get a sense of characters as well-rounded living breathing people who go for a wee and take the bins out and stick on an album because it slaps every now and then; in these novels, we're also happier with the idea that things can happen to characters beyond the protagonist that don't directly impact the plot or demand the protagonist knows more than their own very limited vantage point. you have more room to play with character as a result.

jkr, ofc, isn't that kind of author. jkr is in fact an author for whom everything about her characters serves the plot. this, after all, is the brain that brought you 'remus lupin' the werewolf, and named the bad-guy-turned-good-guy in a book using a big black dog as a red herring omen of death 'sirius black'. jkr wants her audience to notice clues and remember little details about characters because they might be significant later on. this is entirely her wont and - lupin and sirius aside - she's often very good at it. the hp books are all standalone mysteries, and, when they land, those mysteries slap. ginny being the culprit in CoS is a genuinely satisfying resolution to the whodunit plot: this was reflected in critical reception at the time and was part of the reason why hp was able to be marketed as a children's book adults would also enjoy thereafter. there are also very satisfying foreshadowing and mystery plots that straddle the entire series and that reward the reader with reasonably good pay-off at the series end. (my favourite is the foreshadow within the foreshadow - e.g. regulus black barrelling back from ootp in DH, but then regulus' plot turning out to ultimately exist to foreshadow snape's own double agent status... delicious).

for my part, it's also what i want out of the fiction i read and the stories i try to write. i want everything to mean something. i want the weather, clothing, setting, body language etc to all do heavy lifting. i want character work to do work. it makes it fun for me to write and (i hope) it can it a bit more fun for the reader.

the problem is that while jkr is good setting up some mysteries, she is bad at others, and the romantic plot is one she falls down (a bit) on. she sets herself up for this: she wants to be a plot-centred mystery writer, so she does have an obligation to do better in how she deploys character details. jkr does to try to write the harry/ginny romance like a mystery, with little hints throughout the series up to the reveal of harry's feelings for ginny in HBP. (even ginny's full name is nominative determinism, finally revealed in DH once the reader has been told her place in the plot - ginevra, so guinnevre, the hero's queen). and while i will never not tire of pointing out to all of reddit that harry/ginny didn't come out of nowhere, and there is some satisfying foreshadowing knocking about here and there, i think it's fair to say that the harry/ginny build-up is not as satisfying as it could have been because jkr is basically lazier about the clues that ginny is the character harry will ultimately fall for, while she is much better at dropping clues for the series' central plot. that ginny ends the series with no real resolution of the primary tensions that motivate her other than her love of harry is probably the most acute example of this. but there's lots about her character where jkr phones it in a bit in fleshing her out or taking it to any logical conclusions or interesting plot directions. a smattering of examples:

ginny is the character who spends the entire series demanding to be included and not underestimated ends the series... with no real major role in the battle other than causing harry panic, while all other central characters receive a satisfying narrative arc that speaks to their central motivators across the series as a whole. (for an interesting discussion of what should have happened with ginny and the horcruxes, see here. i didn't even pay @saintsenara to write this!)

there are lots of shades of colour to ginny's character that are introduced pointlessly. i have previously talked about my beef with arnold the pygmy puff. we know ginny is popular but we know nothing of her friends who are all faceless plotless nobodies. we know ginny supports the all-womens quidditch team in a way that implies a nascent feminist politics after a childhood being excluded from playing a sport she loves by her brothers - yet we know nothing of it. we know ginny loves the one wizarding band that seems to exist because she has a poster of them on her wall and it just.... is something we just get told about her. now, all of these suggest ginny is a good time gal and a right laugh at the pub. and that's nice! i too am fun at the pub! but why does it matter? it wouldn't, in another series. but in a series where Everything Matters, it really stands out.

now..... i don't think all of this is an unsolveable problem for those of us writing fanfiction about ginny or harry and ginny as a couple. i don't think this makes ginny an inherently bad character. i hope the amount of life i have wasted thinking about this character is testament to this (...) and i personally find trying to cook up some fleshed-out characterisation and a satisfying arc for ginny, and for female characters more generally, from the crumbs of the original source material to be a very rewarding way to pass the time and a fuck you to a woman who thinks she can gatekeep womanhood while writing some astonishingly antifeminist fiction. i think harry and ginny are a deeply compelling and eminently plausible couple, and i think i return to writing about them as much as i do because i think they have a ton of potential as narrative mirrors and as characters with a rich well of tension but also devotion between them. as i say a lot, i think one of the things the harry/ginny pairing does refreshingly well compared to other romantic lead couples in YA fiction is show a couple that, at heart, genuinely get on very well, have a laugh together and enjoy each other's company in completely mundane lovely day-to-day ways (laundry and taxes u know). i think that's a striking and refreshing dynamic that i like to spend time fleshing out and playing with and writing about. but i can also see that there is an inconsistency in jkr's character work here, particularly her character work writing female characters, of which ginny is among the most acute examples.

[rwbyrg]

hi! noticed the ask by the anon about the reactions to rosegarden and i can't help but wonder...

do you think any of them would have some reservations because of the oz in oscar's head thing? i reckon there may be some slight lingering intensity for each member regarding him so there's a chance they could be wary... but more so for ruby and oscar, rather than exclusively ruby

I answered the last ask on the assumption that them becoming canon wouldn't happen until after the war is won and the Oz curse is broken. Simply because I don't think either of them have the time or capacity to tackle that sort of relationship before the main plot is resolved. So in the hypothetical situation that they would get together and it's before the curse is broken, I think there's a chance some of the people around them might be a bit wary. At least Qrow, Tai, and maybe Yang. However, with it being so close to the final fight, it would probably be the least of anyone's concerns at that time. "Seeing as the world might end in three weeks, so long as those two are happy for whatever time we have left, I don't really care if Oz is around for it or not", if you know what I mean?

That being said, I think I am too biased to answer this in a yes-and kind of way. I know you're probably asking in good faith, but in full transparency, I'm pretty jaded by how often this particular topic gets brought up. Since this is not the first time and probably won't be the last, I'm going to take this as an opportunity to share my stance on this idea as a whole.

Ozpin's place within Oscar and RG's stories is one of conflict; which is what all stories revolve around. And it is not, nor has it ever been, a deal breaker for RG's relationship to me. The Ozcarnation curse is an allegory for a few things. The first is simply growing up. RWBY is a coming of age story, and Oscar isn't the only one going through that arc. But this conflict and grief of how he doesn't get to choose the kind of person he wants to be - largely because of the people he's met and things he's experienced - is not unique to him. The curse is just a fantasized and exaggerated version of it.

The next one isn't so much an allegory as it is plainly stated in the text, but it's a story about choice. It's about how even when we are irreversibly changed by things outside our control, we can still choose who we want to be. Even when it's hard, even when the influences are strong, even when it's downright traumatic. Oscar's story is about self discovery and self acceptance; about choice and change. Regardless of if Oz fades into the background, or his curse is broken, or they become a blendy merge of the two of them, Oscar is still going to remain his own person in some way by the end of it. Because this is ultimately a happy story and that is the main driving conflict of his personal arc.

The assumption that Oscar is going to get absorbed or overwritten by Ozpin being such a common take in this fandom never ceases to confuse me because of that. It also confuses me because the show - while it doesn't fully explain the extent of the merge mechanics - has told us that Oz has had families in his previous lives by "learning to live with the souls with which he had been paired".

The other allegory I'll mention - of which I am not the first, nor necessarily the best, to be pointing out (here is a great example from a little while ago) - is one for plurality. Some of the friends I've made in RG spaces have DID and have spoken to me about how they interpret the Ozcar situation; how it's similar or different to their own experiences. Hearing those stories, once again, makes it really hard for me to see Ozpin as any sort of deal-breaking barrier to a rosegarden relationship. This idea that Oscar must be isolated from his friends and constantly scrutinized when showing interest towards any romantic partners because of Oz's presence lacks both imagination and compassion for me. Oscar never asked for this curse, he didn't do anything to deserve it, and to condemn him to a lonely life because of something like that seems really antithetical to the themes of this story and to the characters involved. While some characters within the story might have some doubts about the relationship, at the end of the day it is not up to them on what Ruby and Oscar decide to do for themselves.

Again, this isn't aimed at you, Anon. I just wanted to say my piece on it given how pervasive this topic is. I truly look forward to the day where folks can talk about RG without this being the first thought or argument that everyone jumps to.

[anxious-witch]

Dead boy detectives characters as their big three in Astrology-Charles

Text in the pictures and more explanation under the cut

So, this, unlike Edwin's, aren't canon, just my hcs, although Charles is imo implied to be a Taurus in a scene where Edwin says Taurus and Aries are highly incompatible. Because I refuse to believe this boy is Aries and even less so that Crystal is a Taurus so.

Taurus-Sun

~ Strong will & aesthetic sense, very tactile

~ Loyal & great at taking care of what they love

~ Patient & present, drinks in life with no rush

Sagittarius-Rising

~ Wide-eyed truth seeker, lives life as a quest

- Spontaneous, adventurous, philosophical soul

~ Inclusive & generous, magnet for opportunity

Cancer-Moon

~ Soulful & deep, needs emotional security

~ Sympathetic, extra sensitive & very protective

~ Sentimental, strong ties to the past & family

Text from moonomes.com

So, he'd be a perfect balance of earth, fire and water in his big three. Taurus Sun, aka he is grounded enough to have a stable base people he cares about can lean on. Fiercely loyal, once you have his affection, he'd anything for you(cough like fight a demon or go to Hell cough). As a Venus sign, he cares about his apperance, but still keeps it comfortable. Hence why he looks so effortless cool throughout the series. Also Tauruses often love to indulde in little pleasures, such as food, so it's no wonder Charles complains about missing spaghetti. He is a creature of comforts.

His down to earth attitude balances well with Edwin's Capricorn qualities. Both are grounded, but when Edwin focused solely on the goal, Charles is there ti be present in the moment and notice what happens around them and react accordingly. Like with the Night Nurse, where Edwin froze, because he had no idea how to face this kind of threat. Charles was present and his protective instincts kicked in immediately. 

Then we have Sagittarius Rising. I knew he had to be some sort of fire sign, because that boy has so much inner fire to keep him going. And Sagittarius is exactly that. Rising signs are all about how one is perceived, and Sagittariuses are positive and friendly, with boundless energy. One could say that Charles' statement of being "aces with people" fits perfectly here. They are always here for the new adventure and experiences, especially when they are surrounded by people they love to be around.

Last but not least is Cancer Moon. Cancers are known for having many emotions, even having a reputation for crying often, although that's not necessarily true. Having it as his Moon, that represets emotions, especially hidden ones, does mean Charles has lots of feelings. He is sensitive to feelings of others, and in normal circumstances, should be of his own. However, he, similarly to Edwin, isn't a fully realized Cancer Moon at the beginning of the series. He bottles up his feelings, hiding behind his more "desirable" Rising. But eventually, the dam breaks, and he cries and/or lashes out.

Also, interestingly, Cancer Moons are known to be very possessive, which we see when Edwin is spending time with Monty or the Cat King. 

With his full potential realized(which I think, he has more work to do than Edwin does as things stand rn) he'll be a wonderful friend, attentive partner and somehow who freely expresses his emotions, both good and bad.

[epiphainie]

I completely agree with you in that there are many bad faith interpretations of tommy and buck and tommy’s relationship. I don’t know if this one I’m about to share would necessarily be a bad faith interpretation but I’d like your take on it. In the scene where buck comes out to eddie, eddie says to buck “this changes nothing between us” and buck responds with something along the lines of “uh good, that’s a relief”. I’ve seen a lot of people interpret buck’s facial expressions as not showing just relief but relief mixed disappointment because a part of buck wanted things to change between them, in the romantic sense, he just doesn’t realize it. I do agree that buck’s expression as he says the words is interesting but I don’t personally think it has anything to do with him harbouring romantic feelings for eddie. for me it felt like one of those moments where you dread the reaction for so long, that when you finally face the thing and open up, even if the other person’s reaction is positive, it takes a minute for you to really internalise it and let yourself believe it.

Another moment that people often talk about from this scene is reaction to buck saying he can’t stop thinking about tommy. People often say eddie’s facial expression shows some sort of disappointment but again, I don’t know if that’s it? again, it is an interesting expression so I get why people would pause and focus for a minute but to me, it reads as eddie searching for a moment to give his honest advice to buck in the scenario.

Anyway, I’d love your thoughts on those particular moments and how you see them. Again, I’m not saying that the interpretations people are making of that scene in relation to buddie are necessarily in bad faith. I know it’s fun to analyze and interpret scenes in ways that you enjoy and I’d never want people to stop doing that. I just feel like Oliver and Tim have been very clear in that they do not want to tell a story where a guy comes out and is in love with his best friend and if buck was truly disappointed in hearing eddie say nothing’s going to change between them post buck’s coming out, that would be a quite bold contradiction.

Hi anon!

I'm not sure if you actually meant to send this to me because I'm kind of the exact opposite of a person who engages in the practice of reverse-engineering actors' faces to find deep secret meanings that doesn't actually exist in the script. I think it's a slippery slop of a fan practice where if you go "haha he looks jealous here" and want to make it gay in your fantasy world and are capable of compartmentalizing that from the actual text, it's great! If you look at it like it's subtext that is meant to one day come to surface, as some sort of proof that this is not the actual story, you're either too deep in your world that you treat these characters like they have agencies and thoughts and feelings and are not, yknow, fictional - or that actors are making the conscious choice to layer their performances with breadcrumbs for a plot that doesn't exist at the time.

I've seen all these arguments with almost every scene this season. Eddie's face when Tommy enters the bachelor party. Buck's face when Bobby says Tommy is good for him. Bobby's face when he says Tommy is good for Buck. Eddie's smile when they enter the hospital room. Most of these are insignificant and the others have in-text explanation (Yeah, Bobby smiles weirdly in that scene. Guess what, he's kind of planning to kill himself). And like I said, if people want to read these in a pro-Buddie sense and go do fandom stuff with it, that's great. But we all know this fandom is taken over by the question of "will Buck and Eddie happen?" so everyone who's not even doing this in bad faith (I don't think all do) are looking at it in "does this support canon romantic Buddie?" lenses. So much of shipping Buddie is about speculating for the next episode, next season, next whatever that I think it's so easy to find yourself on that slippery slop where you fit every shot, face, editing choice to your interpretation. There's also the sunk cost fallacy at play here - once you do it for so long, it's hard to give up on the belief that it'll happen.

I think both Oliver and Ryan great actors - and that scene is one of my favorites in the season - but no, I don't think there's more to their faces than what they're given to play. Which is as all of them mentioned a billion times, a scene of a guy nervously coming out as queer to his best friend and receiving support. If I'm wrong and the rest of this fandom is right and the production/writers/showrunners are actually fully married to the idea of canon romantic Buddie but The Powers That Be are keeping gay Eddie in the closet as if he's a real person and they're the evil step-mother, and come S10 Buck realizes he's been in love with his bff all along, then yeah in-text, that would recontextualize all their performances. It still wouldn't change what the writers' intention has been with the text as it exists today or be proof that Oliver and Ryan are making acting choices for a hypothetical future SL.

[irldiancie]

All Kagehina “proof” I know of

Ok i wasnt gonna post this but ive been told by a friend to explain why some might ship Kagehina so... try me. i dont exactly ship this myself but lets just say im a pro when it comes to this topic also it's not as bad as i thought it was there are worse ships idk why i was a hater also i lowkey got some of this from shipping wiki but most of it i knew already, plus NOT ALL OF THIS IS NECESSARILY REFERENCES TO THE SHIP it kinda just adds on to it anyways lets just get into it

ok so starting with common knowledge i think everyone knows that Hinata is the protagonist followed with Kageyama being the deuteragonist, they get the most screen time together and are pretty much paired MOST of the series, we get a lot of content with them together while also getting content of them on their own, they're known as the "freak duo," the "greatest teammates" and like 100 other names they've been called I've seen a lot of people intemperate their relationship wrong, I've seen a few say Kageyama was downright "abusive" to Hinata which I think is a little farfetched, but to each their own! They genuinely do care for each other and it shows, even at the end of the manga you can tell how far their relationship has come, even if they consider themselves rivals, they are without a doubt still friends Now a lot of people have said "well they're not gay they're just friends", while this is true, it has been referenced/implied officially in many places, including manga panels and english dubs, so while it isn't canon there is a few cute things about it which we know are official which is why I'm sharing this, I myself know it isn't canon, plus I didn't really make this to prove anything it was kinda for fun sorry if that made little to no sense but I'll start getting into more interesting stuff 1. at the tip of the iceberg we have the fact they're in so much official art together

theres like a 1000 more of these btw theyre often put near eachother even in official arts not based off them

I have like 1k more of these but i have more proof than this but i think you get my point some of this is probably promo art but that's also considered official art so 2. moving on i think another known one is that Ukai calls them lovebirds ONE TIME in English dub and I have no idea who approved that but I think it's funny and obviously this probably meant nothing but take it as you want video of it here 3. this is kinda randomly thrown in but the fact that they also trust eachother, they've mentioned it a couple times but I think it's nice to know 4. i dont remember when this was or what chapter or something but kageyamas grandfather said "somebody even better will come for you", which just happened to be Hinata of course 5. ALSO after that whole fight scene back in season two, Hinata says this

he didnt really consider kageyama as a friend, but he considered him a partner which i believe is more important to hinata. teammates/partners were always something Hinata wanted, as before he went to Karasuno, he didn't feel like his friends in Junior high were necessarily teammates. Meaning he valued Kageyama more because he was his partner.

(credits to triananero for these images) and when him and Kageyama started working together, they most definitely were perfect together, as they balanced each-other out, which made them become an unstoppable duo or whatever they called them 6. the fact that they have matching jersey numbers 9 and 10 moving on to less canon stuff, there is a light novel of Haikyuu called Haikyū!! Shōsetsuban!! which probably isnt close to canon but Furudate was a part of it even though it wasn't written by him, so it's at least somewhat official 7. anyway according to shipping wiki there is a chapter where Kageyama feels "fluttery feelings at the bottom of his stomach" when Hinata texts him, it's on volume 8 chapter 1, I REALLY WANTED TO SHOW YOU GUYS BUT I COULDNT FIND IT ANYWHERE ONLINE. i searched countless tumblr posts and websites but i could only find chapter five and chapter three so im fully convinced this is lost media LMAOOOO 8. also in Haikyū!! Shōsetsuban!! apparently there's a part where Hinata daydreams about him and Kageyama eating under cherry blossom trees i just found that cute AS MUCH AS I WANNA SHOW YOU GUYS I LITERALLY CANNOT FIND ANYTHING OF THIS LIGHT NOVEL ANYWHERE i just know it's real, if I ever get my hands on it which I doubt, I'll share proof it exists btw AND THIS IS REALLY RANDOM AND SOMEONE WANTED ME TO INCLUDE THIS BUT 9. Basically there was a ad for deodorant a couple years back, collabing with Haikyuu, where you could buy deodorants to “smell like them” or whatever, some shippers believe it’s a Kagehina reference as they also advertised Kageyama and Hinatas scents together as some like matching couple thing

and then there's this

And I think I've said enough, there's way more you can find out about this ship, but I hope with this post you've learned something new or whatever... I MIGHT MAKE THIS A SERIES should i do kenhina next or kuroken ANYWAYS DISCLAIMER I didnt look too much into most of these things but I can gaurentee this stuff is true also this was just for fun and not serious but i hope you liked my little post!

[paxopalotls]

RAHH i just read both your tue danny / phantom / dan centric works, and how does it feel to be so correct and compelling and correct? more seriously - what about TUE / TUE Danny do you find most interesting to explore? do you have any characterization / headcanon that isn't necessarily canon compatible? and free space (please ramble about them as much as you want)

Sorry it's taken me so long to go through my inbox! I hope you don't mind the long text; TUE is one of my favorite episodes and Dan is a character that I find very fascinating.

Thank you for the kind words aahh! I don't often write so it means a lot that you liked my works. For context if anyone else is reading this, I wrote a couple IB fics about Dan/Phantom, and my thoughts about him, which I'll elaborate on here.

I have a lot of feelings about Dan, especially since he as a character is so tragic. It's strange to me that no one ever mentions the fact that when Vlad performed the removal of Danny's human half, it was Phantom that betrayed Vlad, not the other way around. I always thought that meant there was something wrong with Dan after the accident also. I delve into it a little in my fic, but I do have more thoughts about his attitude. It's interesting to me that the comic portrays his actions as being motivated by Vlad's self preservation and selfishness, and I don't necessarily disagree, but I do think it's more complicated than that. I personally believe his actions have a very complex motivation, more than just "Vlad is evil so fusing with him made Danny also evil".

It's difficult to deal with grief, and from the few scenes shown, it seems Dan dealt with it by shutting down. I also think he had a lot of conflicting feelings of grief and rage; Danny was the one who regularly defeated the ghosts, but he was also the one protecting them from the human ghost hunters, releasing the ghosts back into the GZ rather than allowing them to be taken for experimentation. I think it would anger him that his lenience towards the ghosts was taken advantage of, leading to the deaths of his friends and family. Vlad never showed an inclination towards abusing the ghosts, so this is what I believe caused him to do such uncharacteristically violent things like paralyze Johnny 13 from the waist down, permanently damage one of Box Ghost's eyes and one of his hands, and destroy Ember's vocal cords.

Something I touched on in my fic too is that I believe Danny has a weird relationship with death, due to the fact that he managed to come back from it, and also due to the general existence of ghosts in his life. AGIT states that all ghosts are people who've died, as well as that some lose their humanity over time. Due to this, I have a belief/theory that Dan expected his friends, if not family, to come back, and when they didn't, he dealt with his loneliness through anger. In TUE, he acts like he doesn't care about any of them, but I think he actually cares too much. He is caustic and taunting towards them, his parents especially, because his anger at them for hurting him is compounded by his grief at their loss.

In addition, the interference of Clockwork probably also contributed to his anger; there are two timelines that exist, the one where Danny lost and the one where he didn't, and the only reason that he won was because of the interference of Time himself. I think this is a lot of what motivates Dan's actions in TUE; he's trying to prove to Danny that the timeline is "inevitable" because he's trying to prove it to himself. His loved ones have already died, and he's angry that this alternate Danny gets a second chance. The only moment of true vulnerability we see in him during TUE is when he realizes that Jazz, his Jazz from his timeline, had always known who he was. It's obvious that despite his efforts to seem unemotional about everything, all of his actions are due to his turbulent emotions, and this is even more evident in canon due of AGIT confirming that ghosts are beings of emotion.

I do think Vlad's emotional state also compounds with this, since Vlad as a character is more prone to hiding his hurts than Danny, which is a large part of what makes up Dan's personality. In addition, Vlad's character is largely driven by a desire for family and affection, but he responds to this insecurity with a need for control and self-aggrandizement. Vlad's goals throughout the show are to amass power, largely to prove himself to those he cares about - Danny and Maddie - as well as to spite those he hates - Jack. His feelings for Jack seem more complicated than that, however; he is upset at what he sees as a betrayal by someone he obviously cared about; the two of them were best friends and roommates before Maddie was in the picture.

I think both Danny and Vlad center a lot of themselves on the people they love, though it's more evident on Vlad's side, and Dan as a combination of them does as well. His tendency is often similar to "splitting" in BPD, where he responds to a perceived betrayal or personal weakness with volatility, which is something Vlad does as well, with Jack, Maddie in some ways and especially with Danny. Dan as well responds with hostility towards people he is attached to who he perceives as hurting him, something that is complicated by the fact that part of what he blames them for is the fact that they died. He is especially ruthless with people he sees as betraying him or his lenience, like Valerie and the ghost rogues gallery; this is also a combination of Vlad and Danny's personalities. Vlad's hatred tends to be more long-standing than Danny's but he also tends to be more methodical with his actions. Danny on the other hand responds to his own anger with immediate aggression, but lets go of slights relatively quickly. Dan, as the combination of the two, holds grudges for a long time, but tends to rely on brute force rather than long term plans like Vlad would have.

He also has a lot of self-loathing, which he projects onto Danny and Vlad from this timeline, Danny especially. As I mentioned earlier, a large factor in this is Clockwork's direct involvement in the current timeline, which superseded his. In addition, I think that Danny and Vlad's interpersonal dynamic might have fed into this; both of them can't bring themselves to permanently harm the other but they do both hold some level of resentment for the other, Danny more-so since Vlad has an attachment to him. Danny's hatred for Vlad especially seems to derive in part from his own fears about himself and his selfishness, and I think that influences the way Dan interacts with both of them.

TLDR: Dan's specific concoction of mental illness derives from both Vlad and Danny, which affects a lot about how he acts and feels. There's a lot to explore about his trauma and how that relates to his new place in the current timeline, and I have a lot of feelings about him. (He makes me sad!!)

[girlfromenglishclass]

The reunion of Penelope and Odysseus at the end of the Odyssey is the culmination of a romance that's kind of grand in scale, so it makes sense that it's been fixated on in artwork. But in the scene, there is the question of the whole slaughter that just happened. There are plenty of relatively moral justifications for it, but there remains the question of Penelope's reaction.

Penelope's reaction to the bloodshed changes the interpretation of the ending, and it's often skipped over in favor of the classic romantic fade-to-black ending. We have three options.

Option #1) Penelope has no reaction to the slaughter/doesn't care. This is the one favored in more cinematic/simpler looks at the story. It's also the closest to what you will find in-text, as they don't necessarily have a discussion about it. Admittedly, it does work best if you're focusing on Odysseus as a romantic hero, fighting to return to his wife. A ten year voyage to get back to her should end in their touching reunion, and a moral debate dampens the climactic end of the story. However, this ending removes Penelope's agency from the plot.

While Odysseus has been outwitting monsters and seducing a goddess, Penelope's role in the story is fixed in her home. (This is entirely fair given the original audience's perception of female virtue) So this means that the suitors and their occupation of the palace is basically her primary concern. We learn about her cleverness and cool head by her ability to outwit them, same as Odysseus with his trials. So for her not to react to the killing of the suitors takes her opinion out of her own subplot. So, verdict: good for a romantic climax, bad for Penelope's character.

Option #2) Penelope is angry about the slaughter. This option does cast a pall over the idea that Odysseus has been toiling away trying to return to his lady love. It says that he'd do unspeakable things for her, but she will cease to love him for it. However, this option definitely offers the most drama. Odysseus returns, but not the same husband she once knew. In fighting his way back to her, he has become a creature of violence. This also could add to the tragedy of the maids who were hanged simply for cooperating with the suitors. The downside is that it completely changes the tone of the ending. Odysseus is given a kind of pyrrhic victory. Also, this is the least in line with text, since Penelope is quite happy to have Odysseus back in canon (once she knows it's him). So, verdict: the most bittersweet ending, most drama, least in line with Homeric canon.

Option #3) Penelope is glad the suitors are dead, and that her husband killed them. Not to be biased, but this one is the most fun. It also is compliant to a canon interpretation, for the same reason listed above. This makes sense with Penelope's predicament. As a woman in Bronze Age Greece, her home is where she has the most influence and power. With her husband away, she has more authority over it than ever. (See Clytemnestra's control over court in Agamemnon's absence) However, the suitors exist as an occupying force. They have taken away her authority, plotted to kill her son, and made her life miserable. In her position, she cannot take revenge, but Odysseus can. In this interpretation, Odysseus frees Penelope and in taking his place as king, returns her dignity as queen. Many readers presume that the primary motivation for the slaughter was that the suitors were, well, suitors. They were here to marry his wife, which he's understandably displeased with, so off with their heads. But really, the suitors are closer to an invading army. One houseguest is annoying; one hundred and eight houseguests is an occupation. The downside? It solidifies Odysseus and Penelope as a murder couple, and depending on your opinion of the morality of it all, implicates her in the crime. So, verdict: the bloodiest, possibly most fun, keeps Odysseus the hero, but does give both characters a sense of brutality.

[neverenoughmarauders]

What are your thoughts on Lily’s feelings towards James in canon? Do you think she loved him like he loved her?

I wish we had insight from one of Lily’s friends in the text on their relationship. ( I don’t count Snape because his memories explanation his behavior and not her.) Lately, I’ve been feeling like he loved her more than she loved him and that’s makes me wonder if that’s the appeal of James with Regulus.

I am so sorry for the delay in responding to this.

I have so many thoughts, but to start with your last question: I am not going to speculate in what makes James and Regulus appealing, as I really don't get it, but no, I don't believe James loved Lily more than Lily loved James.

Did Lily and James love each other?

The doe and the stag - Lily's true love was James Potter

Very often fanfics write about Lily having a doe Patronus before she starts falling for James, and I don't necessarily think that's right.

According to JK Rowling, the Patronus often mutates to take the image of the love of one's life (because they so often become the 'happy thought' that generates a Patronus). Lily's happy thoughts start centring around James, who of course is the Stag. It's not his patrons that changes, it's hers. Lily's doe is a symbol of requited love, with Snape's doe being a symbol of unrequited love:

Although Lily and Snape’s doe Patronuses matched, Severus’s love was devastatingly unrequited. Lily’s true love was James Potter, who, although Lily once told him ‘I wouldn’t go out with you if it was a choice between you and the giant squid’, she ended up marrying the untidy-haired Quidditch player after they left Hogwarts. Their connection and love showed through their Patronuses in a different way to an exact match like Tonks and Lupin. Lily’s husband’s Patronus was a stag, the male form of her doe. The stag and doe complemented each other rather than matched.  [Wizarding World]

Leaving out the patronuses for a bit just because it can be a bit of a cop out

I am very careful about what I categorically say are 'facts' and what is interpretation or headcanons. But here's the thing: We have points of evidence that indicate that Lily and James are in love, and NO evidence to the contrary once we get to their seventh year and beyond. Which means, they were in love. If we were meant to doubt it, we would have been given competing narratives. We are not. Not even by Snape.

What do we know about their relationship (I am going to skip ahead to when they start dating, as it is a post in itself to analyse their relationship pre-dating):

They start dating in year 7, after James matured. They are Head Boy and Head Girl, which isn't by chance - they are clearly similar in brilliance and seen as responsible role models by this time. Interestingly, they are positioned throughout most of the series as a team, chronologically-timewise starting with being Head Boy/Girl in school.

Lily and James got engaged, married and had a child within two years of leaving school. Of course, this could have been the war making them feel desperate and throwing themselves at anyone, but really? James had plenty of friends, Lily we know less about, but they were both occupied with the Order, young, talented and popular (yes both were popular, according to JKR), so there's no reason they would feel they needed to get married quickly, except if they were in love.

Before they got engaged (so likely around 17/18 - and not long after they had started dating), Lily invited James along to meet Petunia and Vernon. It ended disastrously, but it's interesting that this seems to have been the first time Vernon met Lily, as well as James - there's at least very little to indicate Vernon ever met Lily without James. Within a very short space of time, Lily felt James was such an integral part of her life that she simply had to bring him along when she met her sister's husband-to-be.

The pictures of Lily and James. Everything we see about the Potters' life in photos suggest two happily married people. (1) At their wedding: '[Harry] stopped on a picture of his parents’ wedding day. There was his father waving up at him, beaming, the untidy black hair Harry had inherited standing up in all directions. There was his mother, alight with happiness, arm in arm with his dad.' (2) In the order: 'Harry’s heart turned over. His mother and father were beaming up at him, sitting on either side of a small, watery-eyed man Harry recognized at once as Wormtail' (3) In general/in Harry's photo album: 'It was full of wizard photographs. Smiling and waving at him from every page were his mother and father.' (4) The picture that accompanies Lily's letter: '...he kept the part from which Lily laughed, throwing the portion showing James and Harry back onto the floor.'

Lily's letter to Sirius is possibly the biggest clue to Lily and James' married life, and while I've seen it argued that Lily was actually mascaraing her bitterness, I will note that I've heard this read by two narrators in two different languages, and both, like me, read it as Lily being in love and trying to look after not just her son, but also her husband. The letter often denotes them as the team and married couple they are: 'we've had to pack away the ornaments ... we had a quiet birthday tea... we were sorry you couldn't come.' But more importantly, it features the famous passage: 'James is getting a bit frustrated shut up here, he tries not to show it but I can tell -- also, Dumbledore's still got his Invisibility Cloak, so no chance of little excursions. If you could visit, it would cheer him up so much'. We've all lived through the pandemic, so we know how easy it is to get frustrated, and James, from everything we learn about him, is a man of action - just like Sirius. What Dumbledore says about Sirius, I think it's likely applies just as well to James: 'Sirius was a brave, clever and energetic man, and such men are not usually content to sit at home in hiding.' Yet James tried to hide his frustrations from Lily - why? Likely because he didn't want to burden her or make the situation harder on her - or he might have feared that she might have felt like she wasn't enough. Lily, however, noticed because she knew him, and loved him. She understood that it was not personal, and she also knew exactly what would cheer him up, and tried to bring that about. It's a short passage that I think shows the two of them trying to take care of each other in their different ways.

Finally, of course, James died trying to give his family time to escape. And Lily - unsurprisingly - screamed when Voldemort killed him. Okay, maybe because she knew she and Harry would have no time to get away - but considering everything else, it's more likely it's the one moment of grief or pain she allowed herself before her focus shifted to keeping Harry safe. 'The green light filled the cramped hallway, it lit the pram pushed against the wall, it made the banisters glow like lighting rods, and James Potter fell like a marionette whose strings were cut... [Voldemort] could hear her screaming from the upper floor'

Did James love Lily more than Lily loved James?

Canon: We don't know - and I am not sure it matters

Usually, I struggle with questions like who loved who most because love isn't this quantifiable thing that can be ranked. However, in this case I do actually have a headcanon... Sticking to the canon, however, we really have no evidence to suggest one of them were deeply in love and not the other. Just because James asked Lily out first doesn't mean James necessarily was more in love with Lily than she is with him.

Headcanon: James fell first, but Lily fell harder

Okay, so I do think they both just loved each other - and I do believe love isn't this quantifiable thing (as per above). However, looking at canon, I can't help but believe that Lily had more of her life in the relationship than James did, so to speak.

Lily was muggle-born and lost/fell out with the only person we know was her friend in canon (we don't know that Mary was a friend, it's not improbable, but we don't know). And it was her best friend to boot. While not moving country, Lily might as well have. She enters the wizarding world which isolates her from most of her relatives - and any friends she might have had before Hogwarts. When we meet Lily as a married woman, we learn that the people she surrounded herself with are Order members (like Marlene), her neighbours (like Bathilda) and James' friends.

James on the other hand, still financed Remus (so even if Remus was more distant from the Marauders than he used to be - which is a valid interpretation based on being suspected of being a spy, not being mentioned in Lily's letter and standing away from the rest in the Order photo, James was still actively interested in and supporting his friend). James was still best friends with Sirius, as is very clear from Lily's letter, Sirius being the best man at the wedding and Harry's godfather. James still liked little excursions. And James was close enough with Peter to let Sirius convince him to be secret keeper, and received him as a visitor shortly after Harry's first birthday.

I am not sure this really counts, but I also can't stop thinking about the whole Snape/James thing. We know James isn't fully honest with Lily in their seventh year. James didn't stop hexing Snape, yet he kept this from Lily. Why? Because she didn't like it and he knew that, yet he couldn't stop himself (though tbf, as we know from Sirius, Snape never lost a chance to curse James).

Yes, James loved Lily, but she's not his end all or be all (not that I am suggesting that would be healthy!). Yet, there's no canonical evidence to suggest that James was not Lily's end all or be all. Well, for both of them, the most important thing in their lives was Harry, and he was really their end all or be all (they both died protecting him), but removing him from the equation for one second. If Lily and James split up, who has the least left? Lily - as far as we know. Therefore, I suppose my headcanon has crept in unbiddenly: James fell first (though not nearly as soon as some fanfics write it as and Lily definitely struggled more with her emotions towards him - 'nah, she didn't' I think is such an important line), but Lily fell harder.

[vashtijoy]

on canon

So here's the deal:

No work of fiction has a single interpretation. There are as many interpretations, pretty much, as there are people, and that's because the job of fiction is to tell us about ourselves—about others too, yes, and about the world around us, yes. But primarily, a work of fiction is a collaboration between the author and the reader/viewer/player/etc.

What does that mean, exactly? Surely the creator is the one who gets to say what a character is? Well, no.

Let's take a character (call him... idk, something nice and generic, like "Boro"). The creator wrote Boro with certain ideas in mind. But Boro doesn't really come to life until he reaches the viewer—when the creator's concept interacts with the viewer, to create something new. And there are a lot of viewers.

A work of fiction is as much what the viewer sees as it is what the creator intended. It's what we all bring to it, as much as it's what the creator wrote. Art is not dictated; it's not a straitjacket, with rules and diktats that must never be broken. Art is released into the world. Because art is nothing without an audience.

What Boro (or his frenemy Ben, or their close lookalikes Bight and Bell, or any characters or canon you want to name) are is as much about how you think of them, and what you see, and what you personally bring to them, as they are about their dialogue and visuals and the events of their plot.

on fanfiction

This means there is really no "bad" fanfiction. We all create and write to our own vision—we draw on our ideas of the original work, on the inspiration we personally drew from it. We take the things that spoke to us—that moved us, or obsessed us, or that we just found funny—and we create things we love, using the original work as a source. Plus, we're all learning our art—some of us have been writing for twenty years, and others have just started. That kid writing today will write the epics of tomorrow. So don't bite the newbies.

Sometimes our shared universes overlap, and that's great! Sometimes nobody else agrees, which can be kind of lonely—but doesn't make your vision somehow less valid. We are not painting by numbers; we're creating a palimpsest of slightly different (or very different) visions.

Why start fights because someone else doesn't share your artistic vision? Make your own thing that you like. We're a flock of birds singing, not the Borg.

digression: so why do you spend so much time talking about canon

I'm more of a researcher than I'm a writer. And what became clear to me very early on was just how much I'd missed on my playthrough of P5R—and just how well the story hung together, when you scratched a little below the surface. Those things interest me. I don't like the feeling that I misunderstood things, and I like unearthing connections, obscure text chats that are easy to miss, cockeyed correspondences that don't necessarily mean anything, and so on.

For me, canon is our shared baseline. It's the light outside before it hits our retinas, before we get into the detail of whether the blue I see is really the blue you see. I find digging into canon can spur ideas; a close look at it can support interpretations that are often ridiculed ("Akechi feels remorse for his actions" would like a word).

Ultimately, everything I blog about is my interpretation. I hope it's accurate and I'm glad when it speaks to people! But it's not the law. And if people are creating things that don't agree with it? Good. That's exactly how it's supposed to be.

tl;dr

Write your story. Sing your song. Tell your truth.

[ink-selfship-shenanigans]

I am not an Ink simp but I do have a lot of headcanons about how he shows affection and thus I am here today to feed y’all.

So canonically Ink is short asf and while he does often get tired of being small, he also takes advantage of it in various ways, I don’t have a ton of examples but it’s a thing and plays a role in a few of these other things.

Often gets clingy, if you are leaving for work he is going to cling to your legs at the door at least jokingly, not controlling but it’s still obvious he doesn’t want you gone.

Will get on stool/counter just so he can kiss you.

They wear fem outfits on date nights, I don’t know why I think that but I do.

Ink acts like an absolute creature at times and this is very visible in his love language.

He often makes pillow/blanket nests and will definitely steal your hoodies and stuff for that purpose.

Love bites, small, gentle, stimmy, innocent ones.

Ink has a neurodivergent love language known as “penguin pebbling”, which is when someone shares small nice things with others as a sign of affection, platonic and romantic. Which means getting handed tiny trinkets he finds or sent silly little memes and posts over text. A lot. He likes to show you things.

He loves snuggly competitive games such as tickle fights and roughhousing, he will make a genuine effort but chances are he’s gonna lose.

Ink also can’t/chooses not to differentiate between platonic and romantic attraction and isn’t entirely monogamous, he just gets cuddly with whoever he trusts, so this doesn’t even necessarily have to be exclusive to one person or for romantic Ink simps. People who wanna vibe with this lil guy platonically can do so too!

I hope this has sufficed, here is your sustenance.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONTRIBUTIONS!!!!

I will help him make that nest

Also the bites!!!!!!!! Combined with those spooky little fangs it makes for an amazing little gesture of affection!!!!!!

And the clinginess!!!!! Little guy is so silly and adorable (and also i just realized it might be a nod to his abandonment issues I'm pretty sure he has? Poor boy I'm never going to leave him :((((( )

[hirazuki]

Give me all the hot takes

🔥🔥🔥

OMG I feel like I have nothing but hot takes, if I listed them all we'd be here for years 🤣 I will give as many as the number of flames you sent!

Under a cut, because (unsurprisingly) it got long XD

There is ✧･ﾟ:* nothing *:･ﾟ✧ in the published text of The Silmarillion to indicate that Eol was chronically abusive/violent towards Aredhel or Maeglin during all their years together. One single snippet of dialogue of one single exchange of heated words does not constitute an abusive environment, as neither do arguments/disagreements or the experiencing of anger. If anything, instead of being present and violent, it seems as though distance grew between them and he made himself scarce more often than not. His relationships with both his wife and his son are clearly shown to be cases of mutual deterioration over time -- people who are fundamentally at cross purposes with each other, as far as wants and beliefs and desires go, and the text quite solidly implies that Aredhel had her share of the blame, given as she was to recklessness, impulse, changeable mood and mind, etc. -- and this decline was almost exclusively exacerbated by the effect of outside forces on their lives (Sindar vs. Noldor, the ban on quenya, Feanor's sons and Aredhel's connection with them specifically, etc.), rather than any more domestic issues between them. Was it unhealthy? Sure, but certainly nowhere near the picture general fandom paints "canon" out to be, and I wish more people would engage in the wonderful nuance the text provides us with. Also, as far as published Silm goes, Eol wove enchantments to draw Aredhel to his dwelling, but it doesn't say he forced or coerced or enchanted her to enter; she entered and stayed willingly. And it drives me crazy to see people flay Eol as a rapist in one breath, while going 'YAS QUEEN' for Melian with another*, when it's the same scenario in, incredibly, the same place -- it smacks of double-standards, and a couple of other words that I will refrain from using, as some people on this website think I'm nice and I'd hate to shatter that illusion XD *I have absolutely no issue with Melian; I really enjoy her as a character. It's the hypocrisy that I can't stand :)

I've ranted about this before in the tags of some post somewhere, but: Celebrimbor. It's been my experience that, fairly frequently, there's a tendency to portray him in a manner that tends to make him very... bland. Wonderbread™, if you will. Idk if it's to contrast Annatar or to contrast Feanor and Curufin, but it ends up making Celebrimbor far too soft and pliable and people-pleasing, distastefully so, taking away all of the interesting hard surfaces and edges. Yes, he distances himself from his family and rejects them; yes, he can want to build a new reputation of his own, untainted by the First Age; yes, Ost-in-Edhil can be a place of open doors and second chances; yes, he can be hyper-aware of his legacy as Feanor's grandson and seek to present an opposite image through his words and actions -- all of this is beautiful. But it's even more beautiful if he's allowed to have traits that are callbacks to his father and grandfather; let him be angry (in private or in public, in short isolated spurts that come out of nowhere or as a simmering undercurrent), let him be shrewd and sharp and opinionated (let Annatar cut himself on him a little). This doesn't mean he can't also be kind and earnest and honest and trying his best. Most of all, let him be greedy -- not only for knowledge or power in and of themselves, not necessarily, but for what those things can afford him: the ability to make that which he loves (i.e. Middle Earth) a better, grander place. We're all greedy for the things we want, and I would argue most of those things aren't negative -- stability, acceptance, a better tomorrow, etc. Greed isn't limited to physical things or luxuries and it isn't inherently a bad thing! [/troy baker voice]. There's just so much there to play with, even completely aside from his dynamic with Annatar, and it just makes me equal parts sad and upset to see a character with such ambition and potential and fire frequently so babied and made naive, that he is reduced to the written equivalent of a soggy waffle.

Okay, now for something that is a bit more lighthearted and personal, but no less hot -- and perhaps? may contradict your own Mairon interpretation (in which case, I'm always happy to agree to disagree ^^) -- I can totally see why fandom makes Sauron into this super sexy/sexual creature but... it's a hard nope from me. He's certainly alluring and attractive to others, and knows how to use it to great effect, but I just can't see him genuinely vibing with it, relishing in it for himself ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ I know I keep harping on the Luthien incident, but it's just such a stark contrast to literally everyone else who comes across her -- including Melkor -- that it's really difficult to interpret his utter non-reaction to her as anything but a personal disinterest in matters of the flesh, at least in and of themselves without some kind of connection/relationship there. Everyone likes to joke about him being the whore/slut of the Silm, and sure it can be funny at times, but that concept is just so alien to how he reads to me.

[onewomancitadel]

I actually wrote a post yesterday about fandom critical posts on here going too far and deleted it because I felt I was fighting imaginary ghosts, but this is going too far, in my view; I wouldn't take it to the post because I doubt OP would care, though.

I don't keep a reading tally. I read. I thoroughly endorse reading as panacea to the soul and for developing the mind. To say that fanfiction don't count as books, is it because

Fanfic is published online

Fanfic is often of poor quality

Fanfic does not have a middleman (agent, editor, publisher) between author and reader

Fanfic follows predictable tropes, formulae, character, etc.

Panfandom practices mean you can be reading more about fanon-wide accepted archetypes as opposed to canonical texts

Fanfic is derivative

I can't peer into OP's head, and this is really more about background radiation of fandom criticism (when I am often myself reflective on the matter), but these are the ones I can glean. 'Sour gummy worms' certainly suggests number 2 is the salient point.

Fanfic is published online

Is The Metamorphosis of Prime Intellect not a book for having been published online in 1994? It's a sci-fi cult classic which has never been officially published because it's too strange and offensive. Clearly, in the web age now, online is not the problem. Once upon a time RWBY was a "webshow", now it's just a show.

2. Fanfic is often of poor quality

Many popular releases are of poor quality. Masturbatory "litfic" navelgazing hyperrealism is of forgettable quality. If we lowered the bar to "literally unintelligibly written" like some fanfics are, then yes, I will allow that fanfic does not even have a base quality filter from the proofreading perspective or even indeed necessarily obeys the traditional literary form. At least if you pick up a published book, it's generally guaranteed to actually be legible. Fair suck of the sauce bottle. But is a published book with poor proofreading, or rejection of literary norms, now not a book? Is a book defined more by publishing practice or over actual discrete novelistic output? If it's the former, we can end the post here. If it's the latter, we can keep going.

3. Fanfic does not have a middleman (agent, editor, publisher) between author and reader

Are self-published books not books? This is another problem related to the first point; my favourite romance novel, The Land of the Beautiful Dead, is self-published. It had no middleman. It would've never been published if it had a middleman, I suspect: too long, too literary, too weird.

4. Fanfic follows predictable tropes, formulae, character, etc.

Take that up with the romance genre, and the historic science fiction conventions, and probably even fantasy too, whilst we're here. Genre fiction has never enjoyed the reception that literary fiction has, and is often intellectually demarcated, but genre fiction books are still books. That being said - I'm sure somebody has made the argument in the past that they don't count as reading, but consuming. I've certainly encountered creative writing teachers who don't just view genre fiction as silly, but actively hostile to real writing.

5. Panfandom practices mean you can be reading more about fanon-wide accepted archetypes as opposed to canonical texts

Panfandom practice is really something that makes me think about fanfic not just as a particular medium of creation but the cultural archetypes assigned to it. I think it's true that recent social media culture has forced more stringent and constrained interpretation of a given canon text and encouraged Migratory Slash Fandom-esque type approach to storytelling... but in some ways I think that's sort of inevitable? All practices have particular cultures. Anything that gets burrowed is repurposed within reason. If Spirk is the heritage of fanfic, the reason slash is predominant is probably because slash was the foundation from the beginning. That being said, I don't think that literary convention means it is not literary. By nature, it has a convention.

6. Fanfic is derivative

This is where you get those really embarrassing "Dante wrote fanfic" justifications when they are not meaningfully the same. But the impetus for this is the fact that transformative storytelling is normal, not aberrant, and not just fangirls wanting their dollies to smush together. When you have a story told to you, you get enjoyment from telling it to others. That's how folkloric traditions survive in part. There's a gross tradition there that I actually can't even really get into, but fanfic is certainly different in terms of cultural value (it is not of religious or philosophical or moral value, for one), medium, tone, genre, conventions, etc. and these are radical divergences from fucking Dante.

Like, let's be honest, it's not about fanfic not counting as "reading" (reading as in reading a book), it's about the embarrassment of fandom, the happy resurgence of cringe culture about fandom, the shittiness of crappy fanfic which flanderises and ruins the characters, and the poorly behaved fans who cannot distinguish transformative fandom from the canon text and the poorly behaved fans who cannot distinguish the canon text altogether. The real accusation here is less that whether fanfic materially counts as a book and reading and more to do with the fact that fanfic is seen as childish and intellectually offensive, which is hostile to reading culture. I follow people on here who say they're too old for it at twentysomething. As a fellow twentysomething, I enjoy fanfic more now than I did as a teenager.

Relatedly there is an issue of fanfic readers celebrating the fact that they don't read books. So they themselves are somewhat responsible for this; there's a proud ignorance to it, that fanfic does things what published work doesn't or is afraid to, that fanfic is free, that they can access fic authors churning out work for them to binge when they want and just move onto the next thing without a thought. This is not a correct perspective either. Reading is good for you. Fanfic can function here as hyperpalatable convenience which supplants expanding your palate. To even know what your palate is, you need to develop that aesthetic and narrative language, which means not just reading the canon but being curious and reading as widely as you are able.

Part of the issue with fanfic, in my view, is that the practice is incestuous. Not just that it has its own conventions, but that it is largely limited by endorsing this very dichotomy that OP of this post is similarly endorsing. Fanfic practices beget fanfic practices beget fanfic practices. The gulf gets bigger.

Is fanfic, then, a book in the sense that it widens your palate? If it's an incestuous tradition, it can leave you out to the cold of broader literary narrative conventions. And that, to me, is actually where the most convincing argument can be made in that fanfic is a narrow corner of a field of infinite possibility. But fanfic doesn't just encompass a type of story, fanfic comprises self-published short stories, novellas, and novels, working with transformative IP (as is rather natural, bar for copyright disrupting this practice). Judgement of quality and convention is not really the same as judgement of the medium. I can readily make criticism of the former, but I can't really complain about the latter, especially because I believe that you get better at writing - irrespective of what constructive criticism you do or don't get - by just writing a lot. A lot of writing, and a lot of reading. This is why fanfic can be bad if it does not foster widely reading but it can equally help develop your skill by matter of writing a lot and having an avenue to pursue that (and a supportive community).

That is my spiel. I don't intend this as a vague about OP; I have criticisms of fandom myself, but I didn't take it to them because I don't think they would like to hear what I think. I am just interested when arguments like this have their real meaning nested in implication.

Also, I don't make a tally of what I read, so that angle of the argument holds little water for me. I read; what I read makes me read other things to follow the body of an idea; and then I read some more. Pretty straightforward. I think it's weird to gameify that stuff online, and I'll never quite understand it. It's somewhat related to the point OP originally made, because fanfic would "inflate" that book count, but maybe if fic readers thought of themselves as readers altogether, we could all hold hands and read Dostoyevsky and be happy forever.

[bellshazes]

I was going to reply on your post about C vs CC distinction but I couldn't, so I hope you don't mind me asking here - my brain wasn't cooperating today so I was struggling to read it and comprehend it properly as written. But does it basically boil down to the fact that it's difficult to create a distinction between what's considered "character" vs "creator" in the digital medium Minecraft offers for storytelling? That there's no real way to draw a distinction between "this PERSON did this in the game" and "this CHARACTER did this in the story's world" because it's told on a platform and in a way that makes it hard to find a non-fuzzy divide, and that we shouldn't necessarily try to find that line anyway? Basically that - when it's so hard to define canon when "canon" is influenced by the person both on and beyond the screen, and interactions between "characters" are often colored by the creators behind them, and when the story being told is never really fully concrete anyway, it's just...better and, honestly, more fun to just enjoy the nondefinable art form for what it is? Because if that's what you're saying, I wholeheartedly agree. ^^

When the story's medium is a sandbox game, it's much more fun to interpret canon and its connected fanon as a sandbox too, something malleable and formable and explorable in a flexible way that doesn't rely on defined boundaries to be enjoyed. It's sand. You can make a solid sandcastle for a while, but eventually the water that packed it together dries and the wind blows and things shift again, because that's what sand does. Just - let sand be sand. :3

(And if I've totally misinterpreted then I apologize, it's been a long day and like I said, my brain's not cooperating hah.)

~ Pixie

I definitely didn't get back to my original point in that rambling reblog, so I think you've gotten what I was trying for up until the idea that the SMP Thing is nondefinable. I really struggle articulating this all the time and people often do take it the way you have, so it's a failure of explanation on my part...

It's not resolvable into a single truth, but currently the dominanf response to that is to throw the baby out with the bathwater and say if there is no canon, everything is equally true no matter what the text says, because the text is as (un)real and unknowable as my own imagination. I comprehend that this is very fun and believe this approach has absolutely no moral valence. often this evolves into annoying (imo!) fandom standards that become quasi-canonical due to sheer popularity in the group sandbox but whatever.

However my patented peter bellshazes perfect world involve not this kind of overwriting being a dominant fandom mode, but people taking the lack of One Single Master Story all other pieces fit into as a joyous invitation to pick apart all the threads on their own and how they relate without forcing them into anything and seeing them more clearly. It's to me like the difference between trying to force jigsaw puzzle pieces to fit that are from different boxes and - I don't know, like a complex 3D sculpture that is one object but portrays different images at every angle its viewed from. And people discovering that instead of taking photographs to find the One True Angle in 2D, walking around to examine the previously unstudied backside.

that's abstract but in practice it means like... idk treating it more like a vivisection. I love taking different perspectives apart as standalones, and also interrelating them, but finding joy and spaces to explore and discuss and feel through in those individual examinations, and not forcing them to make sense in some master truth. It makes me appreciate different approaches to the medium more, how tone and technique contribute beyond C!Cubito Is This Trait or whatever. I like it when people articulate if we think about THIS event and how it was shown in THIS way (in terms of acting/performance, editing, cuts made or not made, ) then the story is like this and what's in the gaps or what if it extended or what would it have looked like if different choices were made from a craft perspective or how does that contrast with or contextualizes a different series or scenario. throwing nothing out but never looking for a grand unified theory of truth.

Again no moral valence but i just feel like maybe if I can articulate my brand of fandom joy people might want to give it a try! and I genuinely appreciate people who care enough to try and parse what the hell I'm getting at bc it's almost always only when I try and answer questions that I feel like I get better at explaining what I was trying to say, so!