#compare/contrast

[artist-issues]

While we're on the subject of Disney princesses vs. feminism, I want to bring up my own hot take on Jasmine and Aladdin. I see a lot of women saying, "Jasmine's an idiot! Aladdin lied to her!" Well, um, SHE lied first. He first saw her when she was pretending to be a peasant girl, because that was the only way she could sneak out of the palace. And she went along with him lying on her behalf so she could keep up the pretense of being a peasant girl. They're really 2 peas in a pod on that point.

And here's the thing I never see anyone talking about: Aladdin's not your run-of-the-mill peasant boy that desires to trick a princess into marriage for power, prestige, and money. He saw what he thought was a peasant girl in the marketplace and decided, "yup, she's the one." THEN he found out she was a princess and lost hope until he met Genie. In a way, Aladdin's story is just Cinderella in reverse.

I see what you're saying. I actually think it's important to compare how Jasmine seemingly "pretends to be something she's not" with how Aladdin definitely "pretends to be something he's not."

Jasmine and Aladdin make a great compare/contrast character study.

Jasmine's treated like she's precious and worth caring for her whole life. Aladdin is treated like he's worthless his whole life. Jasmine never gets to make her own decisions, even though she's about to be considered an adult. Aladdin has to make all his own decisions. Jasmine doesn't know how dark and dangerous the world is. Aladdin does, he's lived it.

But anyway. The point is, when Aladdin goes out and pretends to be a Prince, he has a goal. He genuinely wants everyone (especially Jasmine) to believe his lie. Jasmine's focus, when she goes out in disguise, is totally different. You can tell she's not really focused on making everybody believe she's a peasant girl. She even almost forgets to pull her hood up and hide her crown in the marketplace.

You can particularly tell she hasn't thought through a big, elaborate lie about a false identity when she is confronted by the angry stall owner. She straight-up says, "If you let me go back to the palace--" And sure, it's in a moment of panic.

But the whole vibe of Princess Jasmine in Disguise is very naive, like she hasn't thought this through, like she was so interested in seeing the world that she didn't expect the world to see her, back.

The point I'm trying to make is, the storytellers were focused on Aladdin being the liar. They did not let Jasmine be thought of with the same culpability as Aladdin for her deception. When Aladdin asks her where she's from, she has the opportunity to make something up. Thats what he would've done, and does do, later on. But Jasmine, NOTICEABLY, does not make something up. She literally says, "What does it matter? I ran away and I am not going back."

(Specifically, she says “what does it matter?” What does it matter where she’s from? That’s all Aladdin can think about: if Jasmine knew he was “a crummy street rat” she wouldn’t value him. But one of the first things she ever reveals about herself is that she doesn’t think where she’s from matters in their first real conversation. Someone had to write that line in. Someone very carefully crafted her dialogue so that we, the audience, knew, somewhere deep down, that Aladdin was wrong to think she couldn’t be trusted with the truth of who he was. But that’s not my point, my point is:) She tells him the truth. The vulnerable, emotional part of the truth. The part that invites Aladdin getting to know her better, the part that opens herself up to follow-up questions about herself.

Because that's what Jasmine represents, and it's what Aladdin learns from in the movie: the truth will set you free. If Jasmine had been the kind of girl who didn't talk to lowly peasant boys, or tried to front and fake and lie, she wouldn't have been open enough with Aladdin to fall in genuine love. But she's naive. She believes the best about the world. She easily trusts him.

She's the kind of girl who would give an apple to a hungry child without payment even occurring to her--because in her mind, why would anyone even think about payment when a child is starving? She's the kind of girl who would share how she feels with the first random stranger to be kind to her, regardless of the fact that they're sitting in a ruined abandoned hut or they just met two seconds ago and she already knows he's a smooth-talker.

She's just trusting. She chooses trust (without being an idiot) while Aladdin does not. Because Aladdin doesn't believe that the truth will set him free. Jasmine does. And she lives like it.

Al's not a Cinderella story. Cinderella doesn't have to learn anything in her story--she teaches everyone around her. She also doesn't make decisions to change her circumstances. She makes decisions to stop her circumstances from changing her. Aladdin and Cinderella are not alike, except that they're both sort of poor.

[nefelibatat]

So if I were to take away from this moment something deeper than “man Sevika's a freak”, I'd point out that we've seen the same tactic not long before.

What does this say about Caitlyn? She's fighting dirty. She's fighting like a cornered rat. She's fighting like a Zaunite.

And first of all there's hypocrisy. Caitlyn's been calling these people animals and monsters and whatnot but when placed in an identical situation she responds identically. Case in point: getting so mad at Jinx for terrorizing people out of grief that she goes ahead and starts to terrorize people out of grief. Sevika's expression afterwards is mostly “joke's on you I'm into that” but there's some surprise there too — you wouldn't expect that move from a Piltie.

Then there's desperation. Because she needs revenge; she needs it or she'll never ever forgive herself for what happened. So she'll throw away her morals and her dignity and just do whatever it takes to achieve the goal, whether it means chomping on someone like a feral raccoon or becoming a military dictator… which puts her in the same mindset as Zaunites, all of whom are desperate to survive and a lot of whom could never afford morals and dignity in the first place.

[trashcansienna]

lol, lmao even. Decided to draw Leshy and my yellow cat design

[welcometogrouchland]

I have a LOTT of sketches I could post rn but these 2 are recent and I'm fond of them <3 Steph costume ideas and Tim/Damian cringe bickering inspired by Batman: Brave and the Bold #18!

[hinamie]

sidelong

[aceredshirt13]

if there's one thing about classic literary detectives it's that they are not conventionally attractive. doyle told sidney paget to stop drawing holmes so pretty. christie was like "let me introduce you to this short pudgy balding man who is retirement age and i hate him." sayers compares wimsey to maggots on literally the FIRST PAGE

i love it. i love them. stop casting hot people in these roles. we need our detectives to be Charmingly Weird-Looking

[jakkenpoy]

[mayasaura]

It kind of confuses me when I see people talking about cavaliers as if the Nine Houses have established and normalised some radical social role of human sacrifice. It really doesn't seem to me like the role of a cavalier is that simple. The only members of their society we've seen who weren't horrified by the idea were the Tridentarii.

The career soldier, who was born into the military class and trained for that role since birth, believes no necromancer should ever have to see their cavalier die. The other child soldier was killed while putting himself between his cavalier and danger. The heirophant of the Emperor's law who draws on his cavalier like a battery—a level of exploitation the other Houses condemn—turns against the will of his God when he witnesses the sacrifice expected for lyctorhood.

The deliberate sacrifice of a cavalier is not normalised. Not even in the front lines of their military. The role of a cavalier is exploitative, of course, and that's where the interesting part begins. Is it any more exploitative than a king whose knights are trained to die in battle? Than employees who are forced to work or starve? Than the existence of a noble class, or capitalism?

Human suffering exists in any society, and in most societies I know of, much of that suffering we inflict on one another through exploitation. The Nine Houses are not unique in this respect. I am very much in awe of the worldbuilding in this series, tho, that it has managed to defamiliarise human suffering and class dynamics as to show us their grotesquerie plainly without ever tipping over into anything as straight forward as direct allegory.

[hyunpic]

december 2024 with hyunjin

[eveningdawn222]

people who act like batman isn't "judge jury and executioner" because he doesn't kill people are like. genuinely so funny to me because. they're very obviously thinking of "executioner" as like. the stereotypical guy with axe who chops people heads off, and not, yknow, the literal definition of the idiom itself, which is about someone who has the ability to judge and then subsequently punish someone unilaterally. which is quite literally what batman does.

he has the ability to decide what is a "crime" to him, he is the one who decides whether people are guilty of those crimes, and he is the one who executes their punishment. the severity of the punishment doesn't matter - he is unaccountable to anyone else, and indeed is allowed to commit as many crimes as needed to reach his arbitrary ideal of "justice."

the ideal of batman is this: a man who is so fundamentally changed by an act of senseless violence that he takes it upon himself to fight back against the rot and corruption in the world. he does this not through political activism, not through ridding himself of his wealth in favor of a greater good, not through community outreach, but through an individualistic fantasy of being a hero.

and you'll say: charlie, but he does do that !!! he donates his money all the time, he funds social programs, hospitals, orphanages, gets people jobs -

and i will say this: so why don't things get better?

because here's the base of it. gotham, at its core, can't get better. no matter what bruce wayne does, there will always be more crime, more villains, more death, more people for batman to beat up in back alleys. because that's what sells.

reoffending rates don't matter in gotham, prison reform doesn't matter in gotham, what actually causes crime doesn't matter in gotham because that doesn't sell books.

and so here it is; dc has unintentionally created a world where batman can't win, but can't be wrong, and where thousands of nameless, faceless, only-created-to-die civilians must be pushed into the meat grinder that is gotham, to fuel bruce wayne's angst and vindicate his constant, tireless, noble fight against the forces of evil.

and then: a new robin, who is poor and who's parents are dead or gone because of this cycle; who is happy go-lucky and hated by editors and fans for being robin, for not being dick grayson, for being poor.

and this robin is written, unintentionally or not, to be angry at the ways in which batman's (the narrative's) idea of justice is detached from its victims. bruce seems perfectly fine to allow countless unnamed women to be at risk from garzonas in his home country, yet robin is the one who is portrayed as irrational and violent.

this robin is not detached from gotham in the way bruce wayne is: this robin is a product of gotham.

(and here's the thing. you can't punch aids. you can't fight a disease with colorful fights and nifty gadgets. and how would robin dying from aids add to batman's story; it would call into question the systemic changes that haven't been made in gotham. how does a child get aids, in batman's city?)

so robin dies, and then bruce (the narrative) spends the next couple of decades blaming it on him. it is jason's fault; he was reckless, he just ran in, he thought it was all a game. if only bruce had seen what was coming, if only he could have known that jason wasn't rich enough or smart enough or liked enough to be robin.

batman gets a little more violent, a little more self destructive. he hurts people more and almost (!!) kills a couple guys. this is bad because it's self destructive and "not who he is." it is not bad because batman should not be able to just beat people up when he's angry.

and then he gets a shiny new robin - who is all the things jason "wasn't": rich and smart and rational and he doesn't put who batman is into question. batman and robin are partners, and jason is a grave and a cautionary tale, and (crucially here) never right.

the joker kills thousands and it doesn't matter because they were written to be killed.

batman beats up thousands and it doesn't matter because they were written to be criminals.

and then jason comes back, and nothing has changed. there is a batman and a (shiny! rich!) robin and the joker kills thousands. (because it sells)

and jason is angry - he has been left unavenged - his death has meant nothing, just as willis' had, just as catherine's had, just as gloria's had, just as -

thousands. ten of thousands. hundreds of thousands. written to be killed.

but one of them gets to come back.

and he is angry - not only at the joker, but at bruce (the narrative) - because why is the joker still alive (when thousands-)

here is the thing - jason todd is right. not because the death penalty is good, not because criminals deserve to die, not because of everything he says -

but because of what he calls into question. why is the joker alive?

because he sells books.

and dc has written a masterful character, through no fault of their own, because jason knows what is wrong, and he knows who is at fault - batman. (the narrative)

so the argument that bruce can't kill because he's not judge jury and executioner; the argument that jason is a cop or that jason is insane or that jason is in the wrong here; they hold no weight.

batman can't kill the joker because the joker sells comic books.

and jason can't kill the joker because the joker sells comic books.

so he will beg and plead and grovel - he will betray everything that is himself, he will forsake his family and his city and kill himself - just so that bruce (the narrative) will let the joker die.

he was condemned to death by an audience, and after he came back he has spent his whole life looking us in the eyes and screaming, asking, pleading; why is the joker still alive?

why are thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands (the number doesn't matter, see, because they're just a number. not people. not real.) why are we expendable for his story? why did i have to die just for nothing to change?

and the answer is money. and the answer is the batman can never be wrong. and the answer is shitty writing. and the answer is -

nothing jason can ever change.

which is the worst of it all. he is a victim with no power, and no one else in the world can see it. he is raging and crying and screaming at his father and his writers and you - and it doesn't matter. jason doesn't matter. and he knows it.

[frownyalfred]

Batman: I don’t kill. It’s wrong.

Batman three minutes later putting on spiked brass knuckles: anyway did I ever tell you about how Superman is a much better person than me?

[dreadark]

so why is Luka obsessed with Hyuna anyway?

(mostly just trying to get my thoughts on Luka down before blink gone rewires my brain)

every pet human is extremely limited in freedom, but Luka's case is definitely the worst literally even his birth was by Heperu's design... he can't control any aspect of his own life, from his participation of ALNST (twice!) to what he eats on a daily basis

*translations all by whatafruit

humans have no power over segyein, and Luka doesn't even have any power over own his own body so what can he have power over, then?

other humans, of course

most obvious in round 5: Luka would've had an easy win even if he barely tried, but he goes out of his way to provoke Mizi anyway until she finally snaps... and he smiles as he's beaten

because this is his "power." he successfully manipulated Mizi into reacting, proving he has some control over the situation no matter how pointless it is in the grand scheme of things, this is all he can influence, so he makes the absolute most of it and this control is so important to him he doesn't care about his own physical injuries

it's Hyuna talking in this comic, but clearly reflecting Luka's own mentality

while for Hyuna it's likely just her love for singing and performing (whatever happens, they can't take this away from her) for Luka I imagine it's the ability to influence others from the stage (crushing his opponents, but also shaping his fanbase?)

...so back to Luka -> Hyuna

it’s mentioned more than a few times that Hyuna’s a really talented performer, but seeing their respective stat pages really drives it in

(think the “superiority test” Hyuna was put through relates to this also)

Hyuna doesn't seem to have been created in any special way like Luka was… she just has a natural affinity to performing. and that's enough that she’s considered a real rival to Luka—Luka, who was literally made for this, and put through constant hellish training on top (the pain of having your heart stopped...) to mold him into the perfect idol

to Luka… if he can’t dominate Hyuna, he can't even take pride in his own ability (that everything he's forced to go through amounts to something?). and power over other humans is all he has, so he needs to overpower Hyuna (also he likely admires Hyuna’s talents at the same time, which just adds to his twisted feelings)

so since his ability isn't enough... by making someone think of you, only you… that’s another way of having power over someone, isn’t it

“your life is mine” “I told you I only wanted one thing”

whatever exactly happened with Hyunwoo… well that certainly worked. both removing Hyuna's most important person and making Luka someone she can't not think of (oh and he doesn't seem particularly interested in Hyunwoo despite how similar the siblings are in personality? Hyunwoo was even the first to approach Luka, not Hyuna so it's likely because he doesn't have his sister's talents)

but you know how his intimacy(?) value for her is only 70% I figure that's because she escaped, so they could never actually face off onstage... maybe he's disappointed in her "wasting" her ability

what all this amounts to is that she did end up escaping his control, and he never even got to compete against her. so until he can somehow completely overpower her, he'll be obsessed with her

I wonder if this represents his final effort to that... ultimately, he values control over his own well-being, so if he can goad Hyuna into killing him, then doesn't that cement his power over her?

and maybe "saves" him from this hellish life too

kind of a tangent, but I really like how their designs contrast this dynamic Luka looks really angelic and androgynous, so from appearance he seems fragile and like someone to be protected (which even Hyuna seemed to be tricked by when they were younger) and Hyuna obviously looks the stronger one in comparison (very #girlboss (lol...))

but their relationship is one where Luka's trying to control her and Hyuna's trying to escape it... that "beautiful lady" line of ruler of my heart always felt somewhat uncomfortable, and then learning it's actually pitiful (가련한) instead of beautiful is... ...it's a very gendered dynamic, if you get what I mean. despite their surface-level appearances going against what's considered typical

[xinyuehui]

I want to be with you...till death do us apart.

[noelle-abwola]

[sparrowlucero]

do you actually dislike the bird abode or just the creature designs? not saying the name directly so your ass doesn't get blasted by the tag

I like a lot of the creatures in it; the showrunner is a really fantastic horror artist and it really comes through in the aesthetics of the show. I especially like this hand dragon, though there's a lot of other great designs:

As for the show on the whole, it's not bad but not really for me? Early on it really feels like it's schtick will be that it's a subversion of harry potter-esque stories, where the protagonist wants to go on an adventure similar to her favorite fantasy book but instead ends up hanging out with the "villain" (who's actually just othered)/the magic school turns out to be secretly oppressive/the world is kind of gross and spooky instead of clean and approachable... but as it goes along I think it ends up being a pretty by the books YA fantasy thing played mostly straight, and it isn't super interesting or funny or scary or anything besides that. Which admittedly was probably to its benefit, I think a lot of its popularity comes from it being this very tropeish and not-uncomfortable magic school/found family story that's actually queer, like I genuinely think this is hugely appealing to the average cartoon fan on twitter, but I'm just not personally into it in comparison to a lot of it's contemporaries

[vapidlemon]

something something the friend that summer took away something something look only at me something something i want to be possessed by you so bad

i happened to get really into shoujo rei just before i started reading so i did a quick study with them when i was a few chapters in. bc the song wouldn't leave my head