#either positive or negative

[loredrinker]

Is it weird that I take a kind of perverse delight in discourse that can’t stop criticizing Solas and, in particular, the Solas/Lavellan romance world state?

There are plenty of players who reject 'Solavellan' for their own reasons, many of which I understand completely - and most just go on their merry way, playing the game their way and not giving a second thought to it. But others... can’t seem to let it go. Despite claiming to have no interest in the story or proclaim a deep dislike for it, they remain preoccupied by it. And honestly? I love that.

Solas and Lavellan living rent-free in people’s minds is proof to me the writers have hit some kind of nerve. And isn’t that what we want from stories? To feel? Whether it’s good or bad or disgusted or elated?

One of my absolute favorite fandom phenomena is the emphatic declaration: “Not my world state.” A sacred incantation. A verbal sage-smudge meant to ward off emotional investment in a narrative one claims to disdain.  In the case of Dragon Age - it’s often a Solas and a romanced Lavellan.

And yet…still the critical posts come. Still reblogging. Still writing 3,000-word critiques about a character some allegedly don’t think about or a pairing that people find...problematic. Fascinating. Because if it truly wasn’t their world state, why not just ignore it?  I can so easily ignore any world state that I don’t resonate with.  I also can easily read great meta, enthusiasm and critiques on various world states that I don’t subscribe to but can appreciate and learn something new all the time.  

I genuinely believe in everyone finding joy in the game they play. Sincerely. There’s more than enough pain in the real world - we all deserve our escapes. So play your way. Love what you love. Let the rest fall into the Fade. (I appreciate those who do post very respectful discourse and criticisms without resorting to insults.)

But yet

…yet

... some linger. Some rage. Some cry “cringey romance trope” and some cry “horrible misrepresentation” with the same intensity Solas cries “vhenan” during post-Veilguard sex with Lavellan. And that’s okay. Because, to me, it means they felt something.

If people are still talking about it - still critical of it, still dissecting - the story got under the skin. It touched something raw. It stirred something.  Maybe it unsettled a sense of what a “good” fictional romance looks like or what forgiveness looks like. Maybe it made someone feel uncomfortable. Maybe some resent how powerfully others have connected to it. Who knows!?

But stories - especially emotionally and controversially charged ones like Solas and Lavellan - rarely seem to leave people untouched. They provoke. They unsettle. They inspire.

The writers should feel flattered. It means the story had teeth. It left a mark. Some connect with it and lean in. Others don’t and abhor it. But either way, they still let themselves be tethered to it. The effort poured into disliking Solas and Lavellan I see at times only confirms how potent the story really is. Why spend so much time dissecting something that didn’t affect you?

One of the biggest misconceptions about the Solas and Lavellan story is that it excuses Solas (ok, maybe some fans do). But what makes the story so compelling to me is what’s found in the contradictions. It doesn’t ignore Solas’s flaws - it stares them down. Because stories of love can exist in tension with truth. And they can be messy as hell. 

I like the tension. I like that Solas is morally grey, sometimes cruel, sometimes tender. I like reconciling that contradiction - not to absolve him, but to explore what love looks like when it exists alongside pain, grief and betrayal. I don’t need him to be perfect to find his story compelling. And I don’t need Lavellan’s love to be easy or pure to see its value or symbolism. 

And it doesn’t threaten me that he’s flawed or that their love story is flawed. I’m comfortable holding both truths at once: that he’s done harm, and that he’s capable of love. That’s where the story lives for me. Lavellan’s response to him is also complicated and her own imperfection doesn’t diminish the story (and it is just a story after all).

This is not fandom criticism believe it or not (well, maybe? But like, with affection). Like I said, I delight in it. If anything, it just deepens my love for Solas’s story and for Inquisitor Lavellan’s - and their journey together.  It challenges me to dig deeper into understanding what resonates with me.

There is a little secret voice in my head that thinks, if people who dislike it so much are still talking about it, still trying to tear it down - then maybe they are living in the same world state as me after all. 

And I do so enjoy the company. 

[silversupremacy]

What if like !!! Since silver does that little gold thing when he's mad and paintbrush does that fire thing,,,,, I dunno what happens I just equate them together

I can see that, I think any big emotion probably gets Golden Glow to come out, but also I think Golden Glow kinda does whatever they want.

Ex. There's been an instance? Where Golden Glow came out when Silver was feeling more positive than negative. That said, Golden Glow seems to mostly come out in anger more often.

[stingray-art]

you cling so tightly to the beast that waits to devour you

(please don’t tag as ship)

[celtrist]

It's okay to be emotional over a ship.

It's okay to be emotional over a ship. It's okay to be emotional over characters. It's okay to share grievances over a ship as much as it's okay to gush over a ship. It's okay to feel so overwhelmingly negatively over a ship just as much as it's okay to feel so overwhelmingly positive.

While it's always going to be better to focus on positives, it can also be just as good to let out any negatives you might have about something rather than bottling it in and, for some, feeling alone in your thoughts about it.

It is so, so, SO OKAY to be so heavy in emotions concerning a ship whether negative or positive because it means you're invested in the characters and their relationships. When spaces seem to allow only positivity when some people might have some negative thoughts on a ship, it really negates any conversations about it and even understanding sides of why someone may or may not ship something.

While understandable, there is a double standard between being negative and positive about ships (or portrayal of characters). If you feel overwhelmingly negative about something, "you need to go touch grass". If you feel overwhelmingly positive about something, "go at it queen". I would personally argue we all need to touch grass.

It is NOT okay to harass others. It is NOT okay to let your emotions dictate that you should attack somebody for LIKING a certain ship or DISLIKING a certain ship. Your emotions DO NOT dictate how OTHERS should feel.

It is okay to be negative about a character or ship as much as it's okay to be positive about them. Neither side of being for or against a ship is more virtuous than the others. It's okay to have some fucking emotions regardless if their positive or not, because it means you CARE about the media and the characters in it.

No, you should not revolve your whole online experience in negativity. Find positive in things you DO enjoy. But to brush off people who vehemently might dislike a character or ship as "losers with no lives" is to disregard a person's emotions on something. And if you do wanna think that mindset, congrats, people who obsessively love a character or ship are just the same by your logic. Obsession is obsession, regardless if it's negative or positive.

TL;DR, If it's okay to be overwhelmingly positive in liking something like a ship or character, it should be just as okay to be negative in disliking something like a ship or character. Just as long as it's not the ONLY thing you focus on and no one is actively being bullied, attacked, or harassed about it. And of course, either way, positive or negative, it is all fiction, and a real person should not be attacked or harassed for it. And if you don't want to indulge in negativity you might have, 100% valid. Both sides always need to take a step back into reality.

[sun-e-chips]

A rough start to Suns day, then back at home some delivery people had the audacity to talk shit about the park

Yeahhhhhh Suns learned to have a lot of patience but once that’s crossed… oh boy

[revvethasmythh]

listen. there are a number of aspects in which c3 and divergence are not comparable and fundamentally work differently (namely the difference in construction between a long-form campaign and 4-part mini-series), but thematically? not only are they comparable, they are designed to be. divergence is being aired directly after the conclusion of c3 in order to further explore concepts introduced in its conclusion. a world with less connection to the gods, the effect of that on the faithful, how the average exandrian approaches the concept of faith in general (in multiple aspects), the connection between the divine and their mortal children, burgeoning hope from post-war darkness, etc. these are concepts we're being asked to compare with the finale of c3. so if someone says that divergence's handling of faith and exploration of the gods blows c3's out of the water, that's valid. if we were meant to be avoiding comparisons, a) they wouldn't have aired this immediately after c3, b) there wouldn't be so many overlapping concepts, and c) they wouldn't be holding off on having the wrap-up until divergence is over. divergence is in conversation with c3, actively and intentionally, and it puts a stark contrast on how poorly faith was handled in c3, but also things like. understanding character motivation. which yes, is going to shine more strongly in short-form content because you have to get the information out quickly, but is a valid thing to discuss if you genuinely feel you understand a short-form campaign character's goals better than you do a character you spent 4 years watching. it's the difference between a woman who has never been shown to seriously engage with the gods at all stating "i don't know if i want to save gods that don't love me" and the moonweaver saying "if the love is true, it will pass through the barrier" and us knowing that divine magic will continue to be granted to mortals, by the sheer love the primes hold for their children, complex as that love might be. and, fundamentally, divergence is an exploration of consequences. the consequences of the calamity on mortals and the gods and the earth itself, decimated as it is. so when people compare it to c3, when a major complaint of the campaign was lack of follow-through and exploration of consequences, divergence shines for being about exactly what a lot of people felt c3 was missing.

[molathesunfish]

more of this one i'm quite fond of her

[cotardspringtrap]

This is how some of y'all draw William x Henry

[themakeupbrush]

Celine Dion at the 2024 Grammy Awards

[wonder-worker]

Wild how we know that Elizabeth Woodville was officially appointed to royal councils in her own right during her husband’s reign and fortified the Tower of London in preparation of a siege while 8-months pregnant and had forces gathering at Westminster “in the queen’s name” in 1483 – only for NONE of these things to be even included, let alone explored, in the vast majority of scholarship and historical novels involving her.

[boydykedevo]

CRAZIEST YEAR THEME EVER WHAT THE FUCK

[williamaltman]

ASOIAF discourse about gender performance gets so insane because wdym Daenerys is a masculine character... Like she's the third most feminine POV character after Sansa and Catelyn. She's heavily associated with motherhood, marriages and romance. And I don't mean this in a negative way, Dany and Sansa are my favorite characters even though show Sansa was kinda ruined from s5 onwards.

Like yes Dany is going against misogynistic traditions by being a queen and a Khaleesi in her own right rather than as a consort. But breaking gender roles in a sexist society that doesn't let women into the same positions of power as men doesn't neccessarily make someone masculine, male-coded or whatever. She's not a tomboy, butch or even fight hand to hand like Arya/Brienne/Asha. Whether that's a good or a bad thing for you is another thing but it's the truth.

This is pretty much the same for Rhaenyra too, except show Rhaenyra is actually slightly tomboyish in personality and was against the idea of dealing with motherhood and marriage before the time jump.

[corvus-frugilegus]

Man, so often on here I'll see something where I feel like the post is making a really great point, but then is also turning around and being mean spirited about people doing their own thing?

Like not liking a ship is fine. Not liking that other people like a ship for reasons you don't agree with and dragging people over that sucks? You can critique a ship, but you don't have to make it out that other people are doing it wrong for liking it.

[ganondoodle]

Your art and character designs are really really amazing and you should keep drawing and writing whatever you want forever!!!!! I really love the body diversity you show and how, while a lot of your characters are pretty muscular they're not shrink-wrapped like how media always shows them but instead beefy and less conventionally beautiful (but still extremely gorgeous, of course.)!! Idk, it means a lot to me to see that sort of representation ^^ you're also amazing at showing diverse facial types which is so nice to see and I'm just such a big fan of your work 🥹🥹🥹 also the way you use colours is STUPIDLY gorgeous!!! every piece of yours is like stepping into a dream........the colours are so vibrant and it seems to glow from within like when you shine light on a layered oil painting, or something O:

Anyway..I hope this isn't too rambly and maybe improves your day :^) <3

[br1ghtestlight]

the ii neg tumblr blog is like my actual personal #1 enemy i cant BELIEVE they followed me over a joke ask i responded to over a year ago (i blocked them and have blocked every account they've remade lmao) just such hateful bullshit looking for ANY excuse to attack this random youtube webseries and the ppl who work on it including MANY STATEMENTS that are just straight up not true. someone could send them an ask like "hey justin is actually homophobic and called me slurs irl i hope they all die in a car crash <3" and they will post it without any questions. no further research cuz it isnt about what's true or actually offering constructive criticism on the writing of the show it's about being hateful and cruel and spreading lies & death threats. some actual famous people dont have accounts as dedicated to attacking them and every aspect of their identity and career as these random ass guys who make a YOUTUBE WEBSERIES do like why are you actively wishing death upon them?? are you insane?

IF YOU DONT LIKE THE SHOW THEN STOP WATCHING IT. DONT ENGAGE? like do you seriously have fucking nothing better to do than spread lies online about literal nobodies with the smallest amount of online influence. for reasons i cannot even fathom. be so fucking serious

[telesodalite]

Been thinking about idw1's outliers lately, and how sort of wild the whole concept is from a worldbuilding standpoint, and it struck me that most confirmed outlier abilities tend to be really useful, or flashy, or powerfully dangerous, and few to none tend to be like, really boring, or totally impractical, or even entirely useless? Which, doesn't really make sense when considering the fact that outlier abilities are seemingly random.

Surely not everyone who's born an outlier gets something useful?

And I don't mean like, "good" useful, but any sort of useful, even if that means you can kill people with your voice, or give a power boost by exploding yourself, those are still "useful".

But surely there had to be some with abilities that were totally impractical, or nonbeneficial, or at the very least just insignificant or purely aesthetic and pointless?