#ebenezer scrooge analysis

[wisteria-lodge]

How would you sort Ebenezer Scrooge?

So... we are introduced to Scrooge when he is right in the middle of explaining his System to the gentlemen collecting for charity. His taxes pay for prisons and work-houses, and therefore it is not his responsibility to help "idle people" (ie - people who don't want to spend every waking moment working, the way he does.) If people would rather die than go to prisons or work houses - and this is the 19th century so they're REALLY BAD - then "they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population."

So Scrooge looks like a Bird primary. But I don't think he is one. Because the rest of his story is SO Snake.

What first gets him crying in the Past section is the ghost calling him a "solitary child, neglected by his friends." And he is. Young Ebenezer is also neglected by his family - it's unclear exactly what's going on at home, but his father has sent him away to boarding school to rot, and it's only his little sister Fan who somehow convinces him to let Ebenezer come home.

Fan gets cut out of adaptations a lot, but she's important to Scrooge. After she dies giving birth to Fred, Scrooge can't even bear to look at his nephew. So I think what we're looking at is a really, really Burnt Snake primary who looks like a miserable Idealist because - in the absence of People - at least it's something. It's also interesting how the classic Burnt Snake hedonism has manifested in Scrooge as a sort of anti-hedonism... but functionally it works the same way. An extreme focus on yourself and your body.

I think Scrooge's ex-fiancee Belle has him figured out when she says "Another idol [Gain] has displaced me (...) You fear the world too much. All your other hopes have merged into the hope of being beyond the chance of its sordid reproach." Scrooge is so scared of being hurt hat he's made himself into this person who the world can't hurt. Which is why he can't recognize suffering in others, he's too cutoff from his own pain.

All his other lessons are just as Snake-flavored. Bob Cratchit gets through to him because dear GOD that man is a loud Snake primary. And the Future sequence? When Scrooge is dead with no one to morn him? The nightmarish horror of that to a Snake primary.

And in terms of his secondary... Scrooge spends most of the story with a really burnt secondary as well. He doesn't enjoy anything. And then there's the very end, after he gets his second chance:

"He went to church, and walked about the streets, and watched the people hurrying to and fro, and patted children on the head, and questioned beggars, and looked down into the kitchens of houses, and up to the windows: and found that everything could yield him pleasure. He had never dreamed that any walk -- that anything -- could give him so much happiness."

He's enjoying life, and he's doing it in a super Badger secondary way. His "founder of the feast" redemption moment is ALL about building community. We also know that young, lonely Ebenezer made a kind of imaginary friend community out of book characters which is... really sad, and really relatable. And well, he is literally a bookkeeper, so I guess Bookkeeper Badger fits there too.

So - Ebenezer Scrooge. Really, really Burnt Snake Badger with a protective Bird primary model who unBurns over the course of the story. And GOOD ASK. He's an IMPORTANT character.

[princesssarisa]

Since A Dickens December just recently covered the scene in A Christmas Carol, where Fred and his guests play Yes and No, I've found myself comparing the book scene to its equivalent in The Muppet Christmas Carol. In the book, the humor at Scrooge's expense is balanced by Fred expressing his compassion for Scrooge, who, as he watches invisibly, takes the joking in stride and ends the scene in a happy mood. But in the Muppet movie, Fred's compassionate speeches about Scrooge are cut, leaving only the insulting humor (which is reworded too – instead of "rather disagreeable" and "a savage animal," Scrooge hears himself called "an unwanted creature") and Scrooge is hurt when he hears it.

During last year's Dickens December, I seem to remember some criticism of the Muppets' version of the scene, since it alters the scene's entire meaning and does a disservice to Fred's character. That's a valid critique.

But I want to try to analyze what makes it work within the movie.

Not only is the scene rewritten in the Muppet version, it's also placed before the visit to the Cratchit family rather than after. The order of the entire Ghost of Christmas Present sequence seems to be altered in the movie to create a "rising line of tension." (A quote from Robert Wise about the re-ordering of songs in the 1961 film of West Side Story compared to the stage version.)

Both versions of Scrooge's travels with the Ghost of Christmas Present open with the Ghost showing him the happy hustle and bustle in the streets on Christmas morning. Then, in the book, they visit the Cratchits: a happy scene in general, but increasingly bittersweet with the evidence of the family's poverty and with Tiny Tim's illness, and increasingly grim for Scrooge, first with the Ghost's foretelling of Tim's death and throwing Scrooge's own callous words about the "surplus population" back at him, and then with Mrs. Cratchit's disgust and the children's gloom when Bob proposes a toast to him. But after this comes a moody yet uplifting sequence where the Ghost takes Scrooge to various harsh, gloomy places – a miners' hut, a lighthouse, a ship at sea – where nonetheless, Christmas brings people joy. And then comes the joyful scene at Fred's party, where Fred laughs and jokes about Scrooge, but at the same time reveals his compassion for his uncle and makes it clear that his door is always open to him. Throughout these visits, Scrooge's emotional engagement steadily increases, culminating in his being swept up in the joy of Fred's party, forgetting that no one can see or hear him and joining in the games, and ending the visit "gay and light of heart."

The Muppet version changes the order of events to create a steadier line from joyful to poignant. The bustling street sequence is accompanied by the song "It Feels Like Christmas" (one of the best Christmas movie songs of all time). In a less moody and more lighthearted, Muppety way than Dickens, the song also encompasses the theme of "Christmas brings joy to even the poorest and harshest places" (e.g. to the poor mouse family, and to the prisoner and the jailor who act like friends for the day). Throughout the song, Scrooge slowly becomes engaged, and finally, awkwardly yet joyfully dances along with the Ghost.

Afterwards, swept up in the newly-discovered joy of Christmas, Scrooge asks to see family, so the Ghost accordingly takes him to his only family, Fred. Scrooge enters the scene still on an emotional high from the last one, unironically calling Fred his "dear nephew" and happily joining in the game while forgetting that he's invisible. But then, like a punch or a kick, he hears himself called "an unwanted creature," and sees everyone laughing at his expense. At this point the book's Scrooge has already been reminded of how others feel about him by Mrs. Cratchit, and worse, he's already had to face the fact that Tiny Tim might die because of his callousness. This, combined with Fred's compassionate talk, lets him take the mocking in stride; it's mild compared to what he's heard and realized about himself already. But for Michael Caine's Scrooge, it's a startling and brutal reminder of how he's alienated himself from others, just as he's been realizing how much joy friendship and family can bring.

Then the film's version of the Christmas Present sequence culminates with the bittersweet Cratchit family Christmas, and with Scrooge's realization that Tiny Tim might die because of him.

I understand feeling as if the Muppet version does Fred a disservice by cutting his compassionate speeches in the party scene. But his goodwill and eagerness to reach out to Scrooge are still conveyed in his visit to Scrooge's office at the beginning, and including his compassionate speeches might have broken the line of tension described above.

"Rising lines of tension" seem to be generally considered more important in film than they are in books. Notice how most adaptations of A Christmas Carol, including the Muppet version, slightly change Scrooge's emotional journey in the Christmas Past scenes too. In the book's Past sequence, his biggest emotional breakdown is over his childhood – he breaks down crying at the sight of his younger self all alone at Christmas in the miserable school. But the film versions always break him more slowly; he shows restrained sadness when he sees his lonely child self, but doesn't break down in tears until a later point, usually when Belle leaves.

Another comment is I'd like to make is that in The Muppet Christmas Carol, Scrooge's character arc is framed around his loneliness, his realization that he wants love in his life (both to give it and receive it), and his ultimate desolation at how alone and unloved he is because of his own greed and cruelty. Followed, of course, by joy as he finally gives love to others and receives it in return. I'm not sure if this is exactly Scrooge's arc in the book, but onscreen it works.

Analyzing the changes in adaptations, and determining why they work onscreen or onstage (though without trying to claim that they're improvements) is something I could do for hours. Someday I might want to write a whole essay about how, in the musical of Les Misérables, "A Little Fall of Rain" is arguably the most poignant death scene in the show and one of the most moving deaths in any Broadway-style musical – even though some people validly argue that it's much too romanticized and sentimental compared to Éponine's death in the novel, and that it dilutes her tragedy by having Marius grieve for her instead of just coldly pitying her. While of course it's always nice to see a meticulously faithful adaptation of a book, sometimes certain changes do work well.

[imagitory]

So my mum and I were revisiting one of our all-time favorite Christmas movies, The Muppet Christmas Carol, and I think maybe -- just maybe -- there's some really fun symbolism we've all been missing out on. And it all has to do with our main character Scrooge and the color red.

Okay, so at the beginning of the film, Scrooge is in all black, from head to toe. It makes him this wonderful dark shadow over the rest of the cast, and also makes him immediately stand out when he's in public, since everyone else is much more colorfully dressed.

Contrast this especially to the people who are closest to him, Bob Crachit and his nephew Fred.

Well, well, isn't this interesting...both of them have red in their costumes. Even later on, at Fred's Christmas party, we see his wife also wearing red.

The Ghost of Christmas Present -- the ghost who in this film arguably influences Scrooge the most out of all of them -- has a bright red beard...

Oh yes, and we mustn't forget that our favorite narrator "Charles Dickens" is also wearing a bright red coat. (Even his friend Rizzo has some red in his scarf.)

Red as a color can mean lots of different things symbolically -- violence, passion, anger, courage, danger...but I think the one most relevant to this reading is love and warmth. Why? Because even when we see Scrooge as a young man prior to the "all black" treatment, his definitive color is a dark blue.

Notice how much cooler young Scrooge's overall color palette is compared to the much flashier, rosier Fozziwig. (And yes, I think that rosy palette is on purpose -- in the film, Scrooge even describes Fozziwig as being "as hard and as ruthless as a rose petal.") It also makes it so that when Scrooge meets Belle (at this point dressed in pale green with pink rose details), their palettes compliment each other a little bit more, even if Belle's look is still softer, lighter, and warmer in tone to Scrooge's cool, serious ensemble.

But when Belle and Scrooge part ways, we see them wearing colors that contrast much more. Scrooge is still in cool, detached blue, but Belle is in...

Red. Specifically, like Bob and Fred, she has red right around her neck, in the form of her bonnet's ribbon. And it's presumed that over time, after losing Belle and withdrawing more into himself and his own greedy self interest, that Scrooge lost the remaining color of his life and became the cold, black-hearted moneylender we see in the film.

Then of course Scrooge goes through this radical transformation thanks to the Ghosts of Christmas, as we all know...and the very first Christmas present he receives, as a thank you for his charity, is from one of the charity workers, played by Beaker. What is it?

A red scarf.

It's a gift given in the spur of the moment, and yet from Scrooge's reaction, we can tell it's something foreign to him. It's likely it's been ages since he's received such a modest, and yet heartfelt gift from anyone. Scrooge feels the warmth of the gesture, not just because a scarf keeps one's neck warm, but because it was given out of such sincere gratitude and kindness. And as startled as he is by it, he responds with such sincere joy, and wears it happily for the rest of the day. He wears that warmth as easily as Fred and Bob wore it earlier in the film -- as if it's become a part of him. And in a strange way, it has.

For the first time, arguably in his whole life, Scrooge has a true understanding of selfless, loving warmth. The warmth that he should and does feel for the people most central to his life and identity -- his nephew and niece-in-law, his loyal subordinate, his first employer, his first love...even the Spirits who taught him the true "meaning of the season." A kind, generous warmth that permeates the entire story of A Christmas Carol because it's what Charles Dickens loved so much about the holiday season and so wished to spark in his audience.

[iamnotdoinganythingillegal]

“Scrooge was his sole executor, his sole administrator, his sole assign, his sole residuary legatee, his sole friend, and sole mourner”

This shows that Scrooge was an incredibly important figure in Marley’s life and death, being given many responsibilities, such as carrying out the wishes inis will, that might otherwise be given to his next of kin. In addition, the repetition of the word “sole”, a homophone for soul, gives the impression that Scrooge and Marley’s souls were closely entangled, in addition to emphasising how it was Scrooge alone to hold this close position in Marley’s life

“Sometimes people new to the business called Scrooge Scrooge, and sometimes Marley, but he answered to both names”

This gives the reader into Scrooge’s relationship with his deceased partner, showing that he is unwilling to let his legacy die as well. Scrooge’s willingness to be referred to by the other name conveys the closeness of the relationship that the two must have shared in life, as one blended into the other. In addition, there is a connotation of marriage, as particularly in the Victorian era, marriages involved one party taking on the surname of the other

“Jacob!” He said imploringly, “Old Jacob Marley, tell me more! Speak comfort to me Jacob!”

The use of Marley’s first name by Scrooge again implies an intimate relationship between the two men, as both have been exclusively referred to only by their full or surnames up this point in the novel, including by Scrooge’s own nephew. It is also interesting that this is the first time Scrooge speaks to Marley’s ghost as his former partner rather than an apparition, “imploringly” asking to be comforted, perhaps implying he was comforted by Marley in life

In conclusion, ✨Gay✨

[stitchingsins]

No you don’t understand Scrooge isn’t an asshole because he doesn’t celebrate Christmas he’s an asshole because he’s hoarding his wealth during the season of GIVING. He doesn’t become a good person because he sees the joy in the holiday, he becomes a good person because he sees how just sharing a fraction of his wealth would help the people around him. He’s terrified that he will die leaving no legacy but that of a miser. He becomes better after realizes that using his blessings to help those around him is the only way to find joy after decades of making himself miserable for the sake of “moving upwards.”

ITS NOT ABOUT CHRISTMAS

It’s just a method of showing the effects of capitalism. It could have been literally any other gift centric holiday and the messaging would be the same.

[gyrrakavian]

Villain Therapy: EBENEZER SCROOGE from The Muppet Christmas Carol

[caleenbix]

so i want to start this off by saying i love the 2022 adaptation. i genuinely enjoyed some of the changes to the story, including ebenezer wanting to save tiny tim's life rather than his own. however, since it's a shorter adaptation on account of needing to cut things for music's sake (& just short overall), it cuts out some pretty crucial points that further round out why scrooge is actually not the best person.

i would also like to add the disclaimer that i mean all of this politely, and i just want to add some important context from the novella (like you questioned) that addresses these points. with that being said, everything's under the cut!

he may not be a charity, but it's important to remember that he is one of the wealthiest people in london at the time. in the majority of adaptations, the primary introduction to scrooge is him being asked to donate to a fund to help the poor. in scrooge (2022), he obviously brushes it off by insisting on the requirement of a permit. the book (and most other adaptations) has it play out differently. when he's asked for a donation to save the poor from the workhouses (known for terrible and often deadly working conditions), as they would rather die, he responds with probably one of the most well-known scrooge (& arguably, dickens) quotes: "“If they would rather die, they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population.”" yeah, really outstanding fella.

in terms of jenkins, or "the toy shop owner" — his mother fell extremely ill. doctors aren't cheap, especially in the 1800s. 25 pounds is also not a small loan. calculating equivalency, it equals out to roughly $1000 USD. scrooge gives him an extra two days and charges him another $1000 USD for it. that interest rate is basically 50% every day?? if i was in the shoes of jenkins, i'd probably dance on his coffin, too. it's relatively reasonable at that time to ask for more time on loans when tragedy strikes in a family.

bob cratchit is supposed to be what is known as a foil character to scrooge. meaning, he's basically supposed to act as an opposing side of the same coin so that scrooge's own character traits are highlighted. where scrooge is supposed to be overly greedy, cratchit is supposed to be exceedingly charitable, even if it means putting himself at risk. where scrooge is a man without much family to speak of besides for his nephew, cratchit has a large family (though typical for the time). he is supposed to be the over-the-top opposite to his employer.

while i can agree that having the amount of children he had didn't make his financial situation any easier, there's a couple factors to consider. for one thing, it's the 1800s. birth control didn't exactly exist — it did, but it was fairly ineffective practices (jumping up and down, sponges, etc.) and birth control options were largely restricted to the wealthy. two of the children are also a set of twins, which, again, couldn't be detected at the time. sure, the cratchits could have just been celibate after one child, but that's historically not what happened. also, why would he have to be? that's scraping the crust off of some fairly classist rhetoric that i don't particularly have the energy to talk about at the moment.

bob doesn't even blame scrooge! it's his wife who does, and given that she knows not only of his reputation in the city but also about how he treats bob (which beyond christmas, we aren't privy to, but we can assume it's poorly year-round), it's an honest reaction to have.

i think the issue i have most of all is in regard to isabel (especially since i am isabel defender #1). one of the key things highlighted in the novella is that isabel comes from a poor family and, because of this, has no dowry. thus, scrooge would have no money or property coming in from marrying isabel. his marriage to her was purely a love match, rather than one for status or financial purposes. while "later never comes" is a stunning song, it takes away from isabel's reasoning as to why she's leaving.

the novella has isabel come to ebenezer in mourning clothes, suggesting a family member of hers has died. if it's her father, she's in the absolute worst case scenario for a woman in the 1800s. as an unmarried woman, she has basically no rights, especially when it comes to property, and no source of income. marrying ebenezer would give her a house to live in as well as an income that could at least support her in terms of food, which she very well may lack at that point.

she famously argues that she has been displaced by a golden idol, or monetary wealth, in scrooge's heart. when he mentions that being afraid of poverty is natural, isabel points out that their "contract", or engagement, "is an old one" and that it was made when they were both poor "and content to be so". adaptations tend to vary when it comes to determining just how long their relationship has been going on, but most seem to settle on roughly a decade of being engaged (mickey's outright says it's been ten years, while the muppets adaptation suggests it has been that amount of time by the change in belle's clothing, from a 1790s style to a more 1800s/1810s style.

isabel sees scrooge as a changed man, one that would never look her way if they were not engaged at the time because of her lack of a dowry. she asks ebenezer to tell her she's wrong, but his response is...

"He seemed to yield to the justice of this supposition, in spite of himself. But he said with a struggle, “You think not.”"

he hesitates to say that he'd fall in love with her now. he can't even say it himself. he can't even deny it. she doesn't want to leave him, but she states that she "releases" him, because he has made it plain to her that she is of lesser value to him than wealth. he is not, at this point, without the means to marry her. it has been YEARS. they spend little time together; isabel even comments on this in the 2022 adaptation. break-ups very commonly occur when people put their work above their partners entirely. it makes sense that isabel, feeling unloved, would want to leave, and it's all the more upsetting when ebenezer doesn't even make an attempt to reaffirm his love for her.

the one other thing to note is that in the novella, when scrooge asks the ghost of christmas yet-to-come to see a joyous celebration (rather than his death), he is shown a couple celebrating his death. their debt obviously won't be cancelled, but they feel relief because it'd be incredibly bad luck to end up with another "merciless creditor" like scrooge. this refers back to the first point. it's not that he's running a moneylending business, he's the worst in the game. the last resort. one who is not known for treating anyone else like a human being.

a christmas carol isn't supposed to be a commentary on "oh, this guy hates christmas! he's terrible!" & i feel terribly sorry that that's the message people have been getting from this. it was written as dickens's response to the treatment of the poor in victorian england at the time. it's working against the economic theories of adam smith, the father of capitalism, who penned the "invisible hand" theory — the market distributes resources if everyone acts in THEIR OWN SELF-INTEREST. scrooge is an allegory for the ruling/upper class, and, more broadly, capitalism as a whole. dickens was a contemporary of darwin, whose "survival of the fittest" theory being applied to human beings (social darwinism) fueled capitalism further, alongside eugenics.

i love that the 2022 adaptation tried to make ebenezer more relatable for general audiences, but... apparently, it's come at a steep cost.

Ok I watched Netflix's Scrooge and somehow the story doesn't make me go oh, what a happy ending. I don't think Scrooge deserved all that?

He ain't a charity, he lends money. People know upfront they have to pay him back. It's business. I get it when they want a day or two but that bold toy shop mf that had the audacity to dance on his coffin?? He asks for an entire week. I bet many of them already got extra time.

Then his employee. Was it fair of Scrooge to charge so much for the ink? No, but that guy can't blame him for his boys demise. Like, he has child after child and struggles to take care of them all. Maybe don't have that many kids if you can't provide for them? I know these are different times but man, he even gives half of his earnings to charity instead of using it to buy food or medicine and then they blame Scrooge? What?

Man's lost his sister, his mentor and his true love during Christmas. Cut him some slack. He was trying to build a stable future for his wife, not wanting to be like his father who spend his money blindly, which resulted in Scrooges sister becoming fragile and ultimately dying. See, he thinks money solves it all and thus wants to be able to provide properly.

Painting him to be the bad guy for thinking like this after all that happened to him is not right. Maybe the book portraited it in a way that makes sense, but here it seems like they're guilttripping the poor man for being rightfully scarred by his experiences.

[the-gayest-show]

The Haunting of Wells House/Best of Luck Review/Analysis

NEW EPISODES AGAIN YIPPEE YIPPEE YIPPEE

The Haunting of Wells House:

I love a fun episode to get my mind off the angst of Operation Birthday Take back!

The gag of this being a paranormal TV show were so great! So many minor things I loved like the "Paranormal Pursuit" show title they keep saying. Literally cracked me up the way they were saying it.

I also adore the interview gags, you cannot tell me this ain't so fitting for both of them!

"My local paper called my performance of Ebenezer Scrooge 'Not as bad as it could've been'" 😭

Her expression is golden.

Also the reference to that one painting from Cosmo and Wanda was a nice touch (I mean they already had The Scream up there before this)

(The original is called American Gothic, I had no idea! I knew the art piece generally but didn't know the name till I googled and it and suddenly boom that's the name. AND it's from the 1930s! Ain't that cool stuff!)

Jorgan reappearance! We haven't seen you in like. A bit. I'm pretty sure not since the fairy testing thing but I could be wrong. "Father Jorgan" I love how Wanda and Cosmo literally summon him for the sole purpose of "exorcising" a ghost fairy. Funniest shit on Earth fr. Bro was NOT built for the "Father" role. HE LITERALLY GETS "DA RULES" OUT INSTEAD OF A BIBLE IM CRYINNGGGGGGGGGGGGGG

Also why does bro just have like so many cassette tapes? Are they all cursed? Are more fairies trapped in tapes or something? And it's a LARGE collection. WHY DO YOU HAVE THAT MANY TAPES JORGAN WH-

Overall, this episode was fun as hell and I ADORED Hazel and her dad's dynamic together. Tbh it's so cute! Hazel is so enthusiastic about hunting for the apartment ghost with her dad it's so wholesome 🥺 I honestly love the father/daughter duo sm an episodic adventure episode is so nice. Also the TV segment thing was awesome af, enjoyed that a lot. I feel like it's probably in reference to Buzzfeed Unsolved or something.

Best of Luck:

Ohhhhh boy, Dev is back again! And it is NOT looking good! I found this episode to be kinda heartbreaking for many reasons. This entire episode essentially revolves around Dev wanting to make "rule breaking" wishes (eg. win the tournament and that t-shirt) but Peri (being normal about Da Rules) tells him he can't (because he can't) and Dev and Peri have a little fight in which Peri seems to quit. I find that looking back, he might've been crying?

Bro's got tears rolling down his face and everything!

And then he gets replaced with Minecraft Steve Foop Irep, who retains the cube shape he was born in (is this a glimpse into a potential timeline where Peri would've been a sphere?), and really hates his name change unlike his normal fairy counterpart.

HE SAYS HE'S MORE ATTRACTIVE 😭 If only he knew that Peri was a Tumblr sexy man and he.... isn't.

Anyway, Dev literally uses the anti-fairy powers of not giving a fuck about the rules to essentially wish his way into winning the stupid prize, while giving Hazel bad luck (which she manages to get past using good luck charms) and making her lose the tournament.

-

Important thing, let's talk about that scene after Dev wins. He's expecting Hazel to be upset about losing, like... really upset. When she's not that upset and takes losing normally, he lashes out at her.

He WANTS her to react like how he's been reacting to the thought of losing the competition. I think this is still a reaction to his dad being neglectful at the party (and he very likely hasn't stopped being absentee since then). He's projecting his own emotions, and rejecting Hazel's attempts to be nice.

"I don't need your caring and understanding, Hinkle!" (This is also a sign of Dev's detachment from Hazel, since he reverts back to the "everything but calling her Hazel" bit)

He's more happier with physical things rather than emotional. He seems to avoid the emotional wishes, likely a coping mechanism for the neglect, opting to use the rule free wishes of Irep to wish for money, love from some classmate (who he's never been shown to love back in any way before this), to be the King of America (bro really invented monarchy for a monarchy-less country. Crazy.).

And then he literally wishes for Cosmo and Wanda to be nothing! To kill them essentially! I think that's driven by Dev's idea that having two fairies is better than one (a concept I remember being battled on with Remy Buxaplenty and his one fairy), even if it isn't and they're all still bound to the same rules, and by some motivation to get back at Hazel, likely another projection of his feelings.

Just before the mini battle ends, Dev exclaims that he's "finally going to get everything [he's] ever wanted" and that they're ruining it for him. I think, deep down, Dev really wants his dad's affection. I've mentioned this before in the review I did for the Take back episode, but he seemed so devastated about the lack of attention from his father then and even way back from scavenger hunt episode when Dev and Hazel first bonded with each other. Personally, I think Dev was likely going to use Irep (and his ability to basically with whatever, in Dev's eyes) to wish his father could be different. I think that was the real goal, and all the physical stuff was for show and very surface level wishing.

Dev's rejection of Hazel eventually gets to Hazel herself, where she chucks the shirt at him and says "Fine! Take the dumb shirt! I hope it was worth it." Hazel is probably very much done with Dev for the time being, because she tried to reach out to him but she could see he doesn't want any of it.

Let's spawn in the question of Peri. Peri technically should act as a father figure or some kind of parental figure in this case, but he's defo been screwed over by the council for giving him this boy with issues and seems to resent him for constantly not listening when Peri says that some things are against the rules, which is why he temporarily takes a break. I know someone on a discord server pointed out that Peri isn't really bonded with Dev yet, and that really rings true.

You can see this when Peri pretty much ignores his godkid in favour of his parents (which I guess contextually could be described as just being wrapped up in convo, but knowing his track record it's likely the former). THE KID WAS SITTING RIGHT THERE! SAD! Peri, to me at least, doesn't seem like he's emotionally equipped for the job of truly being there for Dev. Cosmo and Wanda seemed way better at this in OG FOP, where they constantly looked out for Timmy, even if he was a bit of a brat at times. But Peri really does care, even a little, as evidenced by the fact that he was jealously watching over Dev while he was gone. He wanted him to call Peri back. I wonder if Peri will figure out how to adjust to being a more parental figures than he hoped, because for now it seems he's thinking about this more as a job than an actual child he has to take care of. I hope he'll improve that aspect of himself, especially concerning the finale.

-

NOW ON TO THINGS I NOTICED!

AYOOOOOO FLIPPED GENDER ROLES OF THE KNITTING AND READING NEWSPAPER LETS GOOOOOOOOO

It's also kinda weird to me that they sorta fly up and come out of the box at Hazel's school after this. It gave me the vibes of "we're living inside the box" but they aren't? Wasn't that their home? Anyways.

I said it once and will say it again: Irep is built like Minecraft Steve. You can't change my mind.

Mr Guzman is so happy at the new nickname lol. He's got that 😎 expression.

JORGAN YOU ARE BACK AGAIN. DOUBLE WHAMMY RETURN. TWO EPISODES IN ROW, KEEP UP THAT STREAK DAWG!

I guess there's a fairy HR too? And I thought the DMV was bad enough. Placing my bets on a fairy godparent union now.

Overall this episode had a lot for me to ponder on and now I wonder what Dev's gonna do with the information about anti-fairies he's gonna collect (how the fuck are the o-pears gonna know shit about this anyway). One of the episodes is Irep and Dev taking over fairy world, so I guess minecraft Steve is gonna make a reappearance, plus Dev will likely try to take over Fairy World with the same vulnerable-ish state he's in. I LOVE the plot thickening! FUCK YEAH BITCHES WE GETTING LORE

[cthulhuwritesstuff]

Helluva Boss trailer analysis/theory time.

Buckle up, I’ve had an epiphany (or just brain rot, who knows)

Let’s talk about this guy.

Vassago is described as: “The third demon in the Lesser Key (including Thomas Rudd's variant) as a prince "of a good nature" and of the "same nature as Agares". He rules twenty-six legions of spirits, and is summoned to tell magicians of past and future events, and locate lost objects.” (Source: Wikipedia)

Key part of this theory: “Summoned to tell magicians of past and future events.”

Now! Let’s talk about this guy.

Stolas, our sad little bird, who is, in fact, a magic user.

So for the confusion that won’t leave my head:

The thing in the trailer that just keeps bugging me is that something is off about this part. There’s details that don’t make sense to me.

First of all, Stolas’s facial expressions in these scenes; he looks like he is truly looking down on Blitz, talking down on him, treating him like a “impish little play thing”.

But Blitzo is just there, in Stolas’s garden, with his feet kicked up. Idk, but something about Blitz being so causal about this makes no sense to me. As well as Stolas’s whole attitude toward him.

Furthermore, the detail of the symbol on Stolas’s robe. That is just too obvious, it is glaring, and again it is very much a dick move since we know what kind of relationship and feelings Blitz has toward the circus and his past.

And the fact that in these scenes we do not see Blitz’s face even once, but we do in every other scene. (Might be cause in those scenes his circus mark is not there or looks different, perhaps, and that would be a clue like the carpet pattern in Ghostfuckers when he sees his mom, so we know it’s not real… omg, I am going insane, aren’t I?)

But then we have this scene.

Where Stolas looks terrified and not able to defend himself? Again, how does that make sense? Also, he is clinging onto Blitz, and there’s a sword? We already established that Andy might be the one attacking here, since it’s the same icy ground and stuff. But the rest of it is confusing.

Okay, wait, my POINT IS: what if none of these scenes are real?

What if Vassago just showed Stolas his possible futures with Blitz? A possibility where he never grew feelings and understanding? A possibility where Andy and Stella somehow take over the palace and his powers and trap him?

We know that future is not certain, and if we are to follow Dr. Strange’s logic, there are many alternatives to what the future might end up being. It all depends on our choices, right? Think of it as Ebenezer Scrooge, but in Hell. (Not to mention there is a Sinsmas episode….. JUST SAYING)

We already saw that Blitz deals with some introspection of his own, seeing his past, all the painful moments. So what if Stolas goes through the same thing with Vassago who shows him how, based on Stolas’s choices, these are his alternative futures? Even the “You never loved Mother, you never loved me, you love him” part? The “Do you have any remorse for what you do” part?

Even this part. (Past and possible future- emphasis on possible)

I don’t know… I do not know. Just saying. Just thinking cause they took over my brain! Anyway, that’s it.

I am probably dead wrong, and this is just a bunch of word vomit, but I had to get it out of my system.

[juliedrawz]

🌼 Big Info/Update on my "Coco" Book 🌼

So it's almost been a year ...

Wow! What a journey so far! I wanted to take my time to talk to you "every dear one of you who loves my art and follows me" for a bit. Now, this will be a long post so keep that in mind!

I cannot remember a year in which I went through so many changes. I grew a lot mentally and I learned a lot. When I first watched Coco, I didn't know at all what kind of impact it will have on me. I know it did for a whole lot many more than just me. It's not just a movie, it's something that moved my heart in depths I cannot explain. Look, the only movie franchise who ever was able to impact me that deeply was Lord of the Rings/Hobbit, but then Coco came along and well ... Héctor! ... and Ernesto.

But talking about Héctor in every little detail possible is planned for another post. There is so much! And Ernesto even more. Ernesto is actually (has actually) been my biggest surprise this year 🤯 And let me tell you why for a little because this is a important part of this whole post!

Villains. We all know what a villain is. When I first saw Ernesto, I was instantly drawn to his charmful personality. I love mexico! I love mexicans, (they happen to be one of the funniest, kindest and most temperamental ones I ever came across and they understand how to celebrate life and death!) At first, we only see what Ernesto can do without knowing anything just yet. I was blown! Let me get this down, he's a musícan with a inrcedible voice (I have an opera education background so I connect to his trained voice), he's a actor, a showman, he's a phenomenal horseback rider and he's handsome! I don't need to tell you about the punch in the guts you end up having later!

Oh, yes! Something I would say! Seriously! I do act like that whenever I am burning for something! *cough* snowflakes quite recently! It was late and my boss only had 1 client left and it started snowing big flakes and I went full child excited mood "think Ernesto and fireworks" until they hit me with their "Augh, snow! Cold, wet, annoying!" And then I literally turned into this cinematic drama queen telling them about nostalgia and the spirit of christmas! *laugh* Their faces 😆 Bah humbug! Truly!

Can you imagine Ernesto in the role of Ebenezer Scrooge? I can! 😆 Héctor, Ceci and Imelda as the 3 spirits of christmas. Yes sir! I want that for christmas! *cough* aaand I'm rambling! I was talking about my book ... yes ... back to that!

Anyway! Moving on! I've told you before that as an INFP personality it's in my nature anyway to think and feel myself deeper into things (whatever they are) and I need about 2 or 3 rows to analyze and solidifying my opinion. That's what happened with Ernesto. Yes, at first I was "heck this guy!" Mildly said, I did not like Ernesto. One. Bit. I was mad and I, for the first few moments, labled him as a villain too! But then I rewatched and rewatched and rewatched Coco and I analyzed Ernesto. And after I went "wait a dang minute!" I realized, no, this man is certainly not your typical "Bad guy!" And after my Dad "an ex-soldier and chef prison guard" confirmed my analysis, I started researching and studying on human behavior, trauma (PTSD) and especially psyche! Now, I wanted to do this anyway because of Héctor and Imelda but it played into my hands with Ernesto. But it also flipped my whole opinion of him. It is a canon fact, that Héctor and Ernesto grew up together and were like brothers to each other and I had the statement, that Ernesto isn't proud of what he's done. Oh boy did that flip tables for me! Because guess what! A true villian is evil, period. You don't go thinking about any redemption because they are that far gone! And a truly rotten, evil soul does not regret their actions or deeds, they are perfectly fine and content with them. I would love to share my whole Sherlock Holmes 🔎 action I did on Ernesto with you but I can't because that would def. spoil everything that is to come!

Ok, this whole Ernesto case has changed and impacted my book! And not only that. The longer I wrote, I got back my grammar and writing skills (after not truly writing for years!) I improved and only after months and then going back to the first half of my book, I realized that many things weren't the way I wanted them anymore. The plot was now solid (wasn't at first) some age/timeline aspects changed! I tweaked some things! Grammar too. And that means I will need to go over my whole first bunch of chapters eventually!

Now I really know where my book is heading! From beginning to end! I now have the silver lining! That also means, the Title of my book has changed! But I will change it in time, not just yet!

The thing with Ceci 👓

Honestly, when I first included Ceci in my book, I, just like with many things, as I mentioned, had no idea what to do with her! I knew I wanted her in, because of that one scene! She instantly had me with her sassy attitude. And since it was pretty clear that she and Héctor knew each other and that she's been helping him not only once, I knew that there had to be a connection. And so I went with it. But that was still raw and not well thought through. That came fairly quickly though! And by now, Ceci is, next to Imelda one of the main characters! She plays a big role and she will be very important for the future!

My Book - Not just any other Fanfic

I know that everyone has their own opinion, view of things and headcanons. This is mine! But while it is my headcanon, I had the goal from the moment I sat down and decided "I'm going to do this!" To make my book feel as canon as possible. I knew I didn't just want to create yet another "great" fanfiction, I wanted to create something that is way more than just that. Something that could give huge Coco fans like me something back. Something that has an impact, something that shares what I have in my heart at least a little! I wanted to do something that hasn't been done before! And for once, I dedicated myself to it, no matter how long it will take, I will finish it! Oof, didn't that sound like something Héctor would say?

This thing has become my baby! 😂

I wanted to stay "true" to each character, stay in line and make readers go "yep, that's how it all happened" I wanted the characters to stay real and authentic. I didn't want to change them or make them do things that would fall out of their character. I knew I wanted my book to circle around Héctor mainly but the longer I worked on it, the more I understood that Ernesto, Ceci and Imelda are just as much of a part of Héctor! And developing their story, they became a huge part.

I wanted and still want to bring emotions across as if you'd feel them! I also knew and now I know even more, that my book is "in no way" for children! It is in everyway for us adults, for teens at least! Because I go deeper and touch on topics that are scary, painful, harsh and dark. You'll see that even more in chapters to come!

Conclusion ❗️

Since it's a real book I am working on, I realized that it is pretty normal that some chapters take weeks, sometimes even months to write. I understood that it's ok to take my time! And if it ends up taking me 2 or 3 years to finish it. I stopped feeling guilty when I cannot post new content fast enough because it just takes a lot of time and effort. And besides my passions, life happens and continues. Work happens to be exhausting sometimes, not all weekends end up being a free-time for me. And there are family gatherings, normal things to do, as plain as grocery shopping. And recently, christmas. But I appreciate every time I get to work on my book and my art!

-

So, yes, I had to get to this conclution on my own. While it is clear for others. And that has everything to do with my personality. I love pleasing people and making people happy. And by all means, I love love love what I do! If I could I would double my arms and work on more tings faster! Sometimes I wish I could stay home and work on my hobbies only but that isn't going to happen for me.

So at that point. I want to say "Thank you!" AGAIN! For all you guys who have been sticking around so far! For all the kind words! I hope you'll stick around for the next year/years to come and keep Coco alive!

🌼 Coco is timeless 🌼

It is so much more than just bringing across a deep important message! It has earned itself a very special place in my heart! It has caused me to pick up writing again, and it made me pick up my guitar and finally learn it! I will finish telling Héctor's story! And Ernesto's along with it! And I am no longer scared if some might end up hating it or calling me crazy for it! Because, like Héctor said, then I am, un poco loco! And I want to be nothing else!

[inamindfarfaraway]

Yes! And how Scrooge just recoils! I’m mildly upset the interlude sections aren’t in the soundtrack because they’re also great and I love them, especially this one - the Spirit of Christmas Present throwing Scrooge’s words back in his face is always one of my favourite parts of the story.

Ah well. Guess I’ll just have to rewatch them in the live recording.

Also, to go off-topic as I am wont to do, that particular moment is a good example of how I think AVHSCC really nailed Scrooge’s character. A core trait of his initial characterization is that he isn’t really malicious in an ambitious or sadistic sense; he can’t be bothered to go out of his way to hurt people and he won’t revel in it; the consistent pattern in the first chapter is that other people will start an interaction with him and he’ll be mean in order to get it over with and make them leave him alone. He never seeks people out. His ideal life is being completely separate from the rest of humanity while still getting richer. Heck, he didn’t callously dump Belle once he came to care more about wealth than her, she had to break up with him! Like his father, he’s neglectful, but not necessarily abusive. Dickens makes it clear that he’s a fully law-abiding citizen (taking 1840s employment laws into account). He just doesn’t care to do anything more than the absolute bare minimum to participate in human society, and is constantly working on narrowing that down further. He just doesn’t care, in general. About anyone or anything except money, not even his own health and happiness. What he doesn’t do - attend to his relationships, pay Bob a reasonable wage, show basic compassion and respect to his fellow humans - is worse than what he does. That’s why seeing the Cratchit family’s plights is able to make him feel bad. He doesn’t enjoy suffering. He simply lets it happen because he’s so emotionally shut off and rationalizes that the people deserve it. So, like, he won’t kick a homeless person, but he won’t give to them either.

Or as it’s put much more succinctly in the part of AVHSCC we were talking about, “People need help and you shrug”. Not laugh, not necessarily put them in that situation to begin with or at least do so intentionally. Just shrug and do nothing.

And Dickens’s point was that THAT IS JUST AS BAD. Because people are suffering either way.

THE TRANSITION FROM PRICELESS AND THE FINAL GHOST AHH THE WAY JAMES SINGS "BAAHUUMBUGGG"

[crimson-phantom-designs]

The Interesting Case of Francis Osman and Ebenezer Scrooge. The Golden Pair.

A character Breakdown Analysis Study

A psychological study between the two and how they click.

This is a long worked on character reference I have expanded upon to breakdown Francis personality and what uniquely draws him to a person such as Scrooge as well as Scrooge's unique personality traits. This took forever! Ha ha.

If you read the story The Fox and the Rose it is recommended to read this to get a good understanding what makes both characters tick.

No spoilers for the story, it just touches theoretical events mildly without spoiling the situation itself.

[angellfleshy]

Ok so apparently. The same Christmas Carol movie I did a crackpot analysis on using only my knowledge of the original story, post-it notes, and my closet doors. Has produced a new gilf.

They have made Ebenezer Scrooge a gilf.

[dankusner]

The secret life of pronouns : what our words say about us

Pennebaker, James W.

Chapter one: 7:46

Chapter two: 43:08

Chapter 4: 2:26:39

Chapter 9: 7:17:41

tantor.com

The secret life of pronouns : what our words say about us

Pennebaker, James W.

Narrated by Robert Fass Publication date Mar 12, 2012 Running time 10 hrs

Social psychologist and language expert James W. Pennebaker draws on groundbreaking research in computational linguistics to explain what language choices reveal about feelings, self-concept, and social intelligence, in a lighthearted treatise that also explores the language personalities of famous individuals.

Full Synopsis

We spend our lives communicating. In the last fifty years, we've zoomed through radically different forms of communication, from typewriters to tablet computers, text messages to tweets.

We generate more and more words with each passing day.

Hiding in that deluge of language are amazing insights into who we are, how we think, and what we feel.

In The Secret Life of Pronouns, social psychologist and language expert James W. Pennebaker uses his groundbreaking research in computational linguistics—in essence, counting the frequency of words we use—to show that our language carries secrets about our feelings, our self-concept, and our social intelligence.

Our most forgettable words, such as pronouns and prepositions, can be the most revealing: their patterns are as distinctive as fingerprints.

Using innovative analytic techniques, Pennebaker X-rays everything from Craigslist advertisements to the Federalist Papers—or your own writing, in quizzes you can take yourself—to yield unexpected insights.

Who would have predicted that the high school student who uses too many verbs in her college admissions essay is likely to make lower grades in college?

Or that a world leader's use of pronouns could reliably presage whether he led his country into war?

You'll learn why it's bad when politicians use "we" instead of "I," what Lady Gaga and William Butler Yeats have in common, and how Ebenezer Scrooge's syntax hints at his self-deception and repressed emotion.

Barack Obama, Sylvia Plath, and King Lear are among the figures who make cameo appearances in this sprightly, surprising tour of what our words are saying—whether we mean them to or not.

[exoflash]

I should also add- redemption isn't something "earned" or "deserved". I see a lot of discourse saying "(character) didn't DESERVE to be redeemed! Problematic!" And... really? Did Ebenezer Scrooge deserve redemption? Darth Vader? Heck, Zuko from ATLA that all these people praise? No. They all did horrible, arguably unforgivable things. But they CHOSE to become better people. It's not about "deserve". It's about the choice to break patterns and reinvent yourself, the realization that everyone is capable of being a good person if they just try. That it's never "too late" for anyone.

But no. Apparently modern media analysis just wants to stick with the evangelicals on this one and punish everyone for everything no matter what. Love that /s

the concept and idea of “you can always start trying to be a better person” is extremely important to me both in media and irl and i continue to be deeply deeply disturbed by the trend on this site pushing that these ideas in media are bad writing or even morally reprehensible

because theyd rather someone stay terrible or just straight up die than become a better person 

from a compassionate point of view it’s deeply distressing and from a pragmatic point of view it’s outright frustrating

it’s fucked up. 

[gettothestabbing]

I heard Andrew Klavan once say that It's A Wonderful Life is the mirror of A Christmas Carol. Each man endures a supernatural experience but nothing fundamentally changes about their lives by the end. No villains are defeated. Nothing that happens during the experiences changes anything at all. Ebenezer still wakes up on Christmas morning, same as he would have. George is still standing on that bridge. But they have changed and that changes everything.

Ah, I love that explanation! As usual, a writer like Klavan can strike right at the heart of their similarities.

I like that he called it a 'mirror,' because that's what I was struggling to see. George and Ebenezer are such opposite personalities. George is beloved and trusted by the townspeople from childhood. Though he does the right thing almost every time, he feels as if he's lost his own happiness by giving to others. Ebenezer becomes a less kind and generous person over time as he sees the kind and generous people in his life die young, go into debt or poverty, or leave him due to his own increasingly narrow focus. They both think that giving must impoverish them. They both come to see that the inability to give to others is the worst part of death.