#even just phrasing or line breaks or etc !!!!!

[twentyfivemiceinatrenchcoat]

do you have any inspirations or people you look up that influence your writing? pls share your wisdom with us ari 🤲

LOTS AND LOTS AND LOTS . i take inspiration from every single book i like and game i play and song i listen to and fic i read on here ……. every single thing. my standouts are probably richard siken (i fear his writing has influenced mine in ways i cannot explain) + (mainly) disco elysium!!!!!! :3c probably my fav written source Ever even though it is . a game. its writing is just gorgeous and if you play it i think you can definitely tell there are traces of it in my own ….

in general i feel poetry has always been my biggest source of inspo which is prob why i focus on imagery sm.. but truthfully all writing i consume inspires me!!!

[fox-guardian]

hey guys did you know that um. did you know. first of all did you know i'm losing my mind, secondly, do y'all remember in tma how when someone reads a written statement, they don't really Stop unless they're interrupted? and they read the whole thing easy cheesy, no issues with reading whatever words are there? like. jon literally could read french for a whole statement and was Fine. granted, that's Jon, but like nobody else struggled with pronunciations and whatnot (that i can recall)

presumably, this is an eye thing. either as employees of the institute, or because everyone there is just also eye-aligned in some degree (melanie had the ghost hunting show, the eye is fond of martin, etc)

and then there's tim in season 3 ep 86

[Sigh] Statement of… uh, Benjamin Hatendi… Hateendi? Regarding a… [papers rustling] a blanket. Dead friend. Monster. Regarding his unavoidable and gruesome end. How he tried to hide. He couldn’t. Statement is from… 1983, March 2nd. And I guess… [long sigh] I guess I’m doing this one. Tim Stoker. Archival assistant… Archival prisoner at the Magnus Institute.

correct me if im wrong but i don't recall anyone struggling with pronunciations before this bit. but that's not even the biggest thing here, that's just a lil Taste, a lil Flavor.

note the phrasing there. "Regarding his unavoidable and gruesome end." why would he say this when the written text on the statement says this:

Uh, right. Benjamin Hatendi’s account of… [rustling pages] oh for… a, a strange encounter. Er, statement date, March 2nd, 1983. Melanie King recording. Apparently.

"a strange encounter". that's it. nothing about an unavoidable death, just a "strange encounter". Tim Why Did You Say That.

why would our dear timothy bimothy, who is being pushed to the brink, who is becoming rapidly more depressed and losing hope, say this?

this isn't the only time he's said some weirdly grim shit tho (ep 104)

There was never really any hope for me, though, was there? This was how it was always going to go.

and then there's this bit from elias apparently having Looked into tim (also 104)

TIM All right, hit me with your X-ray eyes then, boss. What do you see? ELIAS Disruption. An unpredictable, angry man with nothing left but the desire to feel in some way revenged. TIM [Sarcastic] Ooh, terrifying! Surely only magic could have let you see so deep inside my very soul.

"nothing left" but the desire to feel revenged. and tim doesn't dispute this, because it's true.

when he first joined the institute he did so in order to look for answers about danny, but then he stopped seriously looking. and now that the circus is back, this is all the drive he has left. not looking for answers, just wanting revenge. closure. an end, if you will.

this is Literally It For Him. a couple lines later he suggests elias kill him, he's At The Breaking Point.

he is so tired, he's lost all hope, and he's saying all this grim shit about "unavoidable death" and "this is how it was always going to go" like hmmmm sounds familiar doesn't it. DOESN'T IT (<- is going insane)

(ep 11) [....] despite the rapid response of the paramedics and how much of his medical history I had immediately to hand, there was nothing I could do to save him. (ep 11) I have no responsibility to try and prevent whatever fate is coming for you. Based on my previous experience, such a thing is likely impossible anyway,[....] (ep 121) There. That was it. That was our fate; where we would always be.

hmmmm sounds a bit like oliver huh? everyone's favorite ex-accountant avatar of the end?? right??

but then there's this last bit i have from ep 86.

why did he stop reading the statement

Statement. “My parents never let me have a nightlight. I was always afraid, but they were ju–” Ugh, this is stupid.

why did he do that. again, correct me if im wrong but when else has someone just Stopped Reading like that without someone or something else interrupting them? why could tim just stop himself?

my theory is this: at this point, tim is completely gone from being aligned with the eye. he no longer seeks to know what happened to danny, he just wants closure. he doesn't wanna do any statement work, and he keeps mentioning these tidbits about hopelessness and the inevitability of terrible events, specifically death.

the eye isn't compelling him to read the statements like it does the others, because it doesn't have as strong a hold anymore. the grip is slipping from him. and by the time the unknowing rolls around, maybe it's lost him for good. maybe he finally fell into a different power he never meant to serve, and yet, he does.

and maybe. just maybe. because i'm so not in denial. but MAYBE. he did die in the unknowing. but maybe he got better.

basically end!tim truthers rise up, this is how end!tim kayaking with his bf oliver banks can still win, etc etc I'm Going Feral <3

[inky-duchess]

Writing Theory: Dialogue

One question, I often get asked on this blog concerns dialogue and how to write it. Dialogue is the characters speaking to one another or even to themselves and while it sounds easy, it can be difficult to chose what your character might say or how they might say it or even how it might present on the page/word doc/napkin you're writing it on.

Content: The What and Why

What is your character actually saying? Your character is in a situation (which hopefully you put them in or at least know what is going on, if you do not, it is OK). But in most situations, most characters interact in some way, whether it is verbal or not. What your character says has to link to the situation in some way. Picture yourself on a bus sitting next to a friend and you have just seen a dog out of the window. What would be the response or the natural line of conversation here? Probably 'Oh, that dog is cute.' or 'This journey is taking forever.' etc. It unlikely would be a long monologue about a character's deepest darkest secrets or an admission of murder. It is unlikely, but of course not impossible. But generally, one usually tries to keep the conversation to the present and the now. Allow your character to get their point, or even part of it, across to who they talking about clearly. Remember not only does their companion need to know what is being said, but as do your readers.

Why is this person saying this? There is a deeper level to what anybody says and we all know this. A person will generally keep to neutral phrases or topics in order to keep the peace, distance themselves from whoever they are having the conversation with or a person will be curt and short with somebody they are not getting along with or a person will be polite and formal to somebody who demands the respect. There is a reason behind word choice, a reason behind tone and even topic. You won't have to delve into the intricacies of the 'hello' or 'hey' types of dialogue but say if a character was in a situation they must or do chose their words carefully, then you have to consider the why of it as you write the conversation.

Characteristics of Speech

Characters don't talk like they are reading from an instruction manual. Personality, experience and other factors effect how your character might speak. Next time you are in a group setting, focus on how the people around you speak, whether its the sentence structure, the tone, the volume or the flow of their words. No character speaks the same as another, and nor should they. I go further into this in this post here. Now you have established your character's voice as it pertains to personality, now consider the actual voice of your character. How would you describe your character's voice? Even if you don't include a description of it in your narrative, you should have some idea of how your character speaks. Some people have gravelly voices, high pitched voices, clear, garbled, etc. You can of course, fan cast a voice if you wish. The way your character speak can give away things about them as people. Contractions, slang and colloquial phrases are often used to denote those of working class or poorer factions whether the lack of them, including a larger vocabulary, are often attributed to a wealthier, more educated class. You can say a lot about somebody by the way they speak and is an important tool in the entire show don't tell deal. Speaking of...

Showing, Not Telling when Your Character is Yapping

People don't often come out with what they really want to say. Thankfully or else I would be unemployed and in jail.

Concealment: Like I said before, characters will sometimes chose words or specific tones when speaking or breaking off at certain points to conceal what they are thinking. The dialogue might look something similar to using different approaches either with a character trailing off before the offending phrase (...) or catching themselves (-) or hesitating/considering their words/pausing before speaking. It doesn't often mean a character is being evasive, they may be avoiding harming somebody's feelings.

Class/Social rank: Like I said above, the way somebody speaks can be an indication of their status in society. This is not a bad thing, we have different ways of speaking because we come from different walks of life, we have totally different experiences. Writing the character's voice with this in mind can indicate your character's background.

Nationality/Culture: As in the real world, we don't all speak the same language, it makes us who we are and marks out our culture and place in the world. Phrases, sayings and specific words or even pauses to consider the wording or sentence structure can denote a character from having a different mother tongue or culture than those around them. Your character may sometimes have to tailor what they say to somebody of a different culture or nationality even if they speak the same language. For example, if I'm writing a post here or in my WIP, I often have to steer clear of slang, sentence structure. grammar structure and phrases that non-Irish people are not familiar with.

Emotion: Emotion and dialogue walk hand in hand, a character will not speak without some emotion behind it and most emotions make us want to say something. Anger will make our words sharper, harsher, more abrupt. Happiness will make words flow faster, more positive and sometimes even jumbled. Grief will make one sound disconnected, numb and unable to think straight. The way your characters speak can tell your reader and the rest of the cast able to read their emotional state even if they cannot see their face or your helpful dialogue tags.

Sensibilities and Personality: Word choice and avoidance of certain words can tell somebody a lot about the person speaking. Somebody who avoids cursing or using 'vulgar' language might be considered proper, mannerly and formal. Somebody who does might be judged. Somebody who avoids topics that are considered taboo is somebody who aligns to social norms and expectations while somebody who tends to venture into incendiary topics is likely not and more free willed. These are not bad things but it can tell you a lot about the person speaking or in the way that person responds to somebody's words.

On Dialogue Tags and the Controversy of 'Said'

(nobody would ever fucking say that)

I don't buy into this drama over dialogue tags. Some writers will denounce them, some swear by them and they have been arguing over this as often as we do about the Oxford Comma. The real truth is that it is up to you. It is not a cardinal sin to use them and there is nothing - NOTHING - wrong with using the word said. There are of course some dialogue tags I personally hate and some I love but there is nothing wrong with the word 'said' or 'says'. Here are a few commonly used tags.

A

Accused: Used to pin the blame on somebody.

Added: Usually used when the character is adding to something they or somebody else has said.

Agonized: When a character is distressed over something.

Agreed: Used when a character allows something or agrees with something that is said.

Acknowledged: Used when giving voice to a fact.

Announced: Used for a statement.

Asked: Posing a question

Answered: To address a question.

Addressed: When a character draws attention to something or draws the attention of somebody.

Affirmed: Used when a character is stating an opinion or fact.

Apologized: When a character is saying sorry for something.

Approved: When a character is giving their support to a fact or something somebody has said.

Articulated: When a character expresses a thought/idea.

Asserted: When a character affirms an opinion firmly.

Advertised: Used when a character is drawing attention to something.

B

Babbled: Used when a character is talking excitedly, often nonsensically.

Backtracked: Used when a character is going back on something they have said.

Badgered: Used when a character is nagging another.

Bawled: Used when a character is crying out, usually wildly and very loudly.

Bellowed: When a character is shouting.

Began: When a character begins a sentence or thought.

Bemoaned: When a character complains of something.

Bit: Used when a character is being sharp with something that is irritating them or angering them.

Blamed: Used when a character is assigning blame for something.

Bleated: When a character is complaining or moaning, usually used in a derogatory way.

Blurted: When a character says something without pause or thought.

Boasted: When a character displays self-pride.

Boomed: When a character speaks loudly.

Broadcasted: Used when a character is announcing something, usually loudly.

C

Called: When a character cries out for somebody.

Chanted: When a character speaks in a monotone or often repeating words over and over.

Chattered: When a character speaks rapidly, usually out of nerves or excitement.

Chastised: When a character rebukes another character.

Cheered: Used when a character is excited or pleased about something.

Chimed: When a character adds something to something already said.

Choked: Used when a character is having a difficult time getting the words out.

Chuckled: When a character laughs slightly.

Chortled: When a character laughs slightly and breathlessly.

Coughed: When a character’s breath catches.

Croaked: Used when a character’s voice is strained or dry.

Crowed: When a character boasts loudly about something.

Cried: When a character exclaims or weeps.

Cursed: When a character use swear words or denounces another character.

Cautioned: Used when a character warns somebody.

Complimented: Used when a character is lavishing praise on somebody.

Condemned: When a character denounces something.

Considered: Used when a character is thinking aloud.

Conferred: When a character discusses something with another, usually quiet.

Commented: Used when a character is expressing a thought or opinion.

Complained: Used when a character is annoyed over something.

Criticized: When a character comments negatively on something.

D

Declared: When a character announces something.

Denoted: When a character is indicating something.

Dictated: When a character is insisting on something, usually forcefully.

Drawled: When a character is talking in a low, slow voice.

Droned: When a character is talking on and on, usually derogatory.

E

Elaborated: When a character goes into detail explaining something.

Emitted: Used when a character makes a sound.

Enunciated: Used when a character makes their words clear, often to add emphasis.

Expressed: When a character conveys their thoughts and opinions on something.

F

Fumed: Usually when a character is angry over something.

Fretted: When a character is anxious, usually a reputation of intrusive thoughts.

G

Gasped: When a character inhales suddenly, usually in shock or pain.

Giggled: Used when a character laughing.

Gloated: When a character is boasting over besting another character.

Grinned: When a character is smiling widely when speaking.

Groaned: When a character makes a low sound, usually in pain or discomfort.

Growled: Used when conveying anger.

Grumbled: Used when a character is complaining but in a quiet, low way.

Gulped: When a character swallows.

Gushed: Used when a character is talking excitedly about something they care about.

H

Hissed: Used when a character is angry or irritated.

Howled: Used when a character is making a loud, drawn-out sound noise out of pain and grief.

I

Insisted: When a character speaks or lends their support persistently.

Interjected: When a character adds something into somebody else’s discussion.

Insulted: To speak negatively about another character.

J

Jabbered: Used when a character isn’t making sense but talking rapidly.

Joked: Used when a character is making a jest or fun of something.

L

Lamented: When a character expresses a deep thought or grief over something.

Laughed: Used when a character is laughing.

M

Mewled: When a character’s voice is talking in a feeble voice.

Mentioned: When a character interjects something but doesn’t explain it.

Mocked: Used when a character is teasing, either in humour or spite.

Moaned: Used when a character is complaining, in pain or discomfort.

Mumbled: When a character is speaking in a low, almost unintelligible voice.

Muttered: When a character speaks quietly, usually in an effort to not be overheard.

Murmured: When a character talks quietly, usually not to be overheard or to not gain attention.

N

Noted: When a character brings attention to something.

Nattered: When a character goes on about something almost absent-mindedly, usually when nervous or preoccupied.

O

Observed: When a character is offering their view on something.

Ordered: When a character is giving instruction to another, usually forcefully.

P

Panted: Used when a character is out of breath or panicked.

Praised: When a character is showing positive attention to something or somebody.

Prattled: When a character is talking about something without a line of thought or sometimes reason or attention.

Persisted: When a character keeps at a thought or opinion.

Q

Quavered: When a character’s voice warbles usually out of fear or anxiety or sadness.

Quipped: When a character makes a witty remark.

R

Raged: Used when a character is angry.

Ranted: When a character goes on about something, usually in a monologue expressing their emotion about the subject.

Rambled: Used when a character is talking about something that doesn’t matter or warrant attention.

Relayed: Used when a character is telling another character about something that happened previously.

Remarked: Used when a character speaks about something.

Replied: When a character answers back.

Reprimanded: Used when a character is rebuking another for an action or word.

Responded: When a character replies to something said.

Recited: When a character repeats something from memory.

Repeated: When a character says something again, usually right after they have said it.

Retorted: When a character replies tartly or sharply.

S

Sang: Used when a character is happy or light about something.

Scolded: When somebody is reprimanding a character.

Screamed: Used when a character is scared or angry.

Squalled: When a character is crying out loudly.

Smiled: When somebody speaks when they are smiling, usually positively but can be negative.

Smirked: Used when a character is being smug.

Sneered: When a character is speaking in a derogatory way.

Snarled: Used when a character is being aggressive or angry.

Snivelled: When a character is speaking through a runny nose or tears. It is usually used to denote a character as weak or vulnerable.

Sniffled: When a character is speaking with a runny nose and tears.

Shouted: When a character is saying something loudly or with extreme emotional.

Shrieked: When a character makes a sharp sound, usually from extreme emotion.

Stammered: When a character’s voice becomes halted with pauses, usually an indicator of a speech impediment or nerves or anxiety or fear.

Stated: When a character makes a statement.

Stuttered: When a character speaks with difficulty, often repeating the beginning of words, usually out of fear, anxiety or nerves. But it can also be attributed to a speech impediment.

Swore: When a character curses or uses vulgar words to express their anger.

Scoffed: Used when a character is being derisive about something.

Sighed: When a character exhales out of annoyance, anger, tiredness or boredom.

Screeched: When a character’s voice becomes high-pitched and erratic.

Spat: When a character speaks so forcefully that they almost spit saliva in their effort to get their often emotion driven words out.

Sputtered: Used when a character is unable to get the words out, usually out of disbelief.

Sobbed: When a character is crying so hard that their voice is garbled by their tears and gasps for breath.

Suggested: When a character proposes an idea.

T

Thundered: When a character is talking about something in an angry way, usually loudly.

Told: When your character is relaying something to another.

Tittered: Used when a character is half-laughing, half-trying to stifle it.

Thanked: When a character expresses thanks.

Trumpeted: Used when a character is excitedly announcing something.

U

Uttered: When a character speaks.

Urged: Used when a character is prompting another to take an action.

V

Voiced: When a character expresses their opinion verbally.

Vociferated: When a character argues vehemently.

W

Wailed: When a character makes a sound of grief, pain or discomfort.

Warbled: used when a character’s voice quavers.

Wept: When a character cries when speaking.

Whispered: Used when a character speaks quietly, so not to be overheard.

Whimpered: Used when a character’s voice is feeble and weak, usually in pain or fear

Wheezed: When a character’s voice is strained from lack of breath, such as after a coughing fit.

Whined: When a character complains usually in an irritating way.

Y

Yammered: When a character is talking about something with no line of thought.

Yelped: When a character cries out in shock, pain or discomfort.

Yawned: Used when a character is tired or bored.

Yelled: When a character speaks loudly out of anger or panic.

Yowled: When a character cries out, usually high-pitchedly.

Overusing dialogue tags can sometimes take a reader out of the narrative and make your scenes read more like plays. I generally follow the rule of 'if it not essential' it is out the window. You can simply write dialogue in speech quotes and nobody will stop you.

What's in a Voice?

While we have already gone through the personal sound of your character's voice, what does it actually sound like when they are speaking? When describing the voice of your character while they speak, allows the reader to hear what they can only read and offer a clue how the character is feeling in the moment.

Absent-mindedly: When a voice betrays one’s distraction

Booming: When a voice is loud and carrying.

Breathy: When a voice is peppered with breathes.

Brittle: When a voice betrays a strained mind or fragile sense of mind.

Clear: When a voice is devoid of anything to obstruct or conceal it.

Deep: When a voice is low pitched.

Flat: When a voice is devoid of pitch or emotion.

Gravelly: When a voice is rough, croaking like when one just wakes up.

Guttural: When a voice is rough, coming from the back of the throat.

Harsh: When a voice is unkind and hard.

Husky: When a voice is rough.

Monotonous: When a voice is unvaried in pitch, all in one tone of voice.

Muffled: When a voice is obstructed, such as when the mouth is covered.

Nasally: When a voice sounds like it is coming from the nose, often sharp.

Piping: When a voice is high-pitched, almost sing-song.

Raspy: When a voice is dry and rough sounding.

Rich: When a voice is pleasant sounding to the ear.

Shrill: When a voice is high-pitched.

Silvery: When a voice is clear, soft, and musical.

Soft: When a voice is quiet.

Sonorous: When a voice is deep in sound.

Thin: When a voice is strained, with uneven pitch and tone.

Throaty: When a voice comes from the throat, often rough and croaky.

Tremulous: When a voice is shaking.

Velvety: When a voice is smooth.

Warm: When a voice is comforting, gentle.

Weak: When a voice lacks any strength.

Whispery: When a voice is low, hushed.

Wobbly: When a voice is unsteady.

Avoid the monologues if you can

Nobody can really have a conversation with somebody when that person is rattling off about themselves or their dastardly plans etc. It's not really realistic but in fiction, we kind of want to allow characters to do on a little, to let loose and bare their soul in a speech worthy of Peter Dinklage's best work (Laws of Gods and Men, GoT Season 4). Personally I only give somebody monologuing a few minutes before I interrupt with the good old "that's crazy" or multiple "yeah"s. A character has to be captivated - or captive - to listen to somebody keep talking, talking, talking.

Interaction

Again, your characters are meant to be real people, they are not robots on stage. When people are talking, it isn't perfect. When emotions are high, people will often cut across one another or interrupt one another. When characters are excited or in agreement, they might finish one another's sentences. The dialogue in The Bear, is fantastic for this as the interactions feel real. The characters interrupt one another, talk over one another and finish each other's thoughts. People follow a pattern of talking with people they know, they are less guarded and more prone to speaking their mind if they are comfortable with them or know what to avoid saying. People are more formal when speaking to strangers. People will speak differently to different people, there are things you can only say to your sibling and you wouldn't talk to a classmate you barely know the same way you will speak with a dear friend. The way character's interact can tell the reader a lot about the relationship between the characters.

[fairyhaos]

How To Fucking Write: a guide by fairyhaos

[masterlist]

this post details:

DIALOGUING INTERESTINGLY

hi gays and gals! the first post on starting and pacing a story did really well, so "how to fucking write" is back, with yet more advice and tips for everyone ^^ please feel free to let me know if there's something you want me talk about, because i'll be more than willing to see if i can help. also a reminder that i have a taglist for this series as well, and please reblog if you find this helpful :)

# - HOW TO DIALOGUE.

.. bullet point one : grammar

okay guys, as a native english speaker, i'll be the first to tell you that this language fucking sucks in terms of its grammar, but when it comes to dialogue, understanding how it works even to some extent will help you branch out and vary the way you write dialogue, which makes it so much more interesting.

with dialogue tags (said, asked, etc) if the punctuation mark in the dialogue is not a ! or ? then it should be a comma.

example : [junhui + castle]

as you can see in the first line, a comma is used rather than a full stop, because the sentence hasn't been finished yet. there's a dialogue tag, ('you correct'), that comes after it. and since the pronoun 'you' isn't a proper noun (i.e. a name) then it shouldn't be capitalised, because, again, the sentence hasn't been finished.

with action tags however, (he smiled, he stood up, etc) then it should be a full stop.

example : [i just made one up bc i don't use this a lot lmao]

"I disagree." He stood up, and walked over to close the door. "This isn't safe. You shouldn't go alone."

and now, since there is a full stop, it indicates that the speech is a sentence all by itself. that means the next word ('He') ought to be capitalised.

but the key part when grammar-ing dialogue in order to make it interesting depends on where you put the action and grammar tags.

if you constantly have lines that are just:

"dialogue," he said.

"dialogue," she said.

"dialogue but a bit longer," he said.

... then it can get repetitive, and annoying. by varying your dialogue structure, it can create more interesting dialogue.

example : [minghao + password]

there's a variety of dialogue and action tags being used with each line of dialogue, preventing everything from sounding too repetitive.

the first line starts with a normal sentence, and an action tag. the second is a standalone line of dialogue with no tags. the second has the action tag in the middle of the dialogue. and the last has a dialogue tag in the middle of the dialogue.

by varying the ways in which you write your dialogue, it makes everything a lot more interesting.

.. bullet point two : verbs and adverbs

the easiest way to make dialogue interesting, though, is to use fancy words.

this can be by replacing 'said' with a range of other dialogue tags (see this really comprehensive list for a whole variety of different words), but i'd advise against overusing these. 'said' is your friend! it's the invisible dialogue tag, helps your reader read through your dialogue in comfort, but of course, if you wanna add a nuanced way of describing the dialogue, then replacing 'said' is the easiest way to make your dialogue interesting.

but don't overuse these. for me, i'd focus on action tags and adverbs.

use interesting adverbs that add description to how a character is saying something can go miles. and using action tags that break through what could have been a long section of characters just talking? it helps so much.

i'd recommend having onelook thesaurus open as you write. you don't have to type in just words: phrases, the overall vibes of the word you're thinking of, all of that can be typed into the thesaurus and they'll provide you with pretty good results each time.

it also really helps when you've forgotten a word and can only remember vague bits of what the word should feel like.

.. bullet point three : voices

the best way, however, is ultimately to create a character. write a personality for them, bring them to life, think about the way in which they would talk and then put that down onto paper.

it's difficult, perhaps the most difficult to do, because it's also so tricky to advise someone on how to do this. it's all about the character you want to create, the personality you envision for them, and the only person who can fully write that is you.

however, i would find a few 'ticks' of theirs and use them as indicators in your writing.

for example, in my seoksoo long fic, seokmin's tick is that he always "chirps" what he's saying. and beams. a lot. this identifies his character, makes him unique(ish), and establishes his personality and differs him to the other characters.

but ultimately, it comes down to word choices, when you're writing a character voice.

like, your character describing something with elegant, floral language vs them going "this is so pretty". or perhaps making them stumble over their words when they're panicked vs them simply just going silent when they're flustered.

it's about being specific. about making choices with your words that would have english teachers analyse and unpick your writing, hundreds of years later.

(even if it's fanfic. especially if it's fanfic: because who knows how many fans may join your fandom in the next few years?)

... and that's it ! if anyone has anything else they want advice on (how to structure, how to write dialogue, how to plan etc) then just shoot me an ask, because i'd love to help however i can :)

tagging (comment/send ask to be added!): @selenicives @stqrrgirle @weird-bookworm @eternalgyu @blue-jisungs (tough luck guys btw but youre gonna be tagged in this entire series ehehehe)

[applestorms]

trying to break down beyond more so here's some random thoughts:

he's very particular about the ways in which he's unhinged/insane, and oddly conscious about every weird thing he does. everything is meant to one-up L: excess sugar (jam + coffee sludge), uncomfortable body movements, presenting as a Genius Detective to hide his own crimes, etc. his weirdness is unnatural and, at least in the ways he specifically tries to replicate L, not innate to him specifically. there's a version of beyond, perhaps pre-L, who is weird in his own unique way.

for a serial killer, he has very little interest in the killings themselves. despite executing all these violent murders, even one of a 13 year old girl, every one of his victims is killed only after they're drugged to unconscious and the mutilation of their bodies is all post-death, for the sake of his puzzles alone. seemingly the only reason why he bothers with murder is because that is what L focuses on, and because his eyes make him so intimate w/ death.

his motives are clearly focused around L, perhaps both as a reaction to L and as an attempt at initiating some kind of interaction? iirc mello claims near the end of the story that his sole purpose is to give L some kind of unsolvable case, but clearly some of his behaviors must be done to antagonize L specifically, since almost nobody else (other than the meta audience) knows who he's presenting himself as/clowning on.

ultimately, it's his ego that gets him. he underestimates naomi's abilities often throughout the story, feeding her clues to ensure that his own puzzles get solved-- perhaps out of a lack of respect for her intelligence, but also to present himself as even more capable? to brag as much as he can?

the congenital shinigami eyes is honestly one of the most fascinating ideas any death note side story has ever presented. there are so so so many questions you can ask here-- is beyond genetically part shinigami? is he or his birth family somehow connected to a death note? how can he read the lifespans? mello describes beyond's shinigami eyes as follows:

Killing people was, for him, normal. Killing people who were fated to die anyway was no effort at all. Mmm, I guess I should explain the idea of the eyes of a shinigami. The phrase is only too familiar to me, but if I don't explain it, some of you will cry foul. The eyes of a shinigami. These eyes could be given out by any shinigami in return for half the recipient's remaining life. Normally contact with a shinigami was a prerequisite for acquisition, but Beyond Birthday had traded nothing--he had seen the world through those eyes since before he could remember. He knew your name before you said it. He knew the time of death of every person he met. ...I hardly need to explain just what effect this would have one his personality. You might think they would hardly be useful without a Death Note, but that is simply not the case. The ability to see someone's remaining life is the ability to see death. Death, death, death. Beyond Birthday lived his life unceasingly reminded that all humans would eventually die. From the time he was born he knew the day his father would be attacked by a thug and die, knew the day his mother would die in a train crash. He had these eyes before he was born, which is why he called himself Beyond Birthday. Which is why a child as strange as him was taking in by our home, sweet home--Wammy's House. (pg. 94-95)

it's unclear exactly how much of this story mello heard from L and how much is him interpreting/theorizing w/ his own ideas. the potentially biased narration is a fantastic layer in this story.

he is the second known wammy's kid to overtly attempt suicide, though his attempt is of course incomplete. we have no idea about the circumstances surrounding A's suicide, though i find it notable that A is mentioned at all as their presence makes this a pattern. this also seems important in conjunction w/ mello's infamous opening line: "I am your narrator, your navigator, your storyteller. For anyone else but [Near and Kira], my identity may be of no interest, but I am the old world's runner-up, the best dresser that died like a dog, Mihael Keehl. I once called myself Mello and was addressed by that name, but that was a long time ago. Good memories and nightmares." (pg. 12)

sidenote: love his use of "the old world," in that quote, i wonder what the original japanese is... fits well w/ the whole idea of L as the god of the old world. anyway,

his relationship with naomi is also Fascinating to me, particularly since it really doesn't seem like either of them have a speck of respect for the other. lmfao. i should really fic write for those two sometime... i really just need to do a proper character study on both of those bitches. lol.

edit: almost immediately upon posting this i open back the damn book back up to this quote:

If he attacked her with intent to kill, he would absolutely fail. He knew that he would. Ensuring his path of escape was far more critical. Naomi Misora was nothing more than L's servant, and if she died there would be dozens of replacements-- from the FBI, the CIA, and the NSA-- even Secret Service. So he had only been testing her. Seeing if Naomi Misora was capable of being L's substitute. "Hmmm...mmmm...hmmm...Huh huh huh huh...no, hee hee hee? I could go with ho ho ho ho, but that's a little too jolly...anyway. Oh, Naomi Misora-- you are pretty good. A shame to waste someone like you in the FBI." She had passed the test, so far. (pg. 95-96)

so. shit, idk. i guess he does still have some respect for her, albeit tempered by that classic death note sexism. shrug.

the beyond vs. KIRA comparison has a lot to consider, particularly when it comes to their egos and how they choose to cover up their crimes. L's reaction to either of them is also intriguing-- as much as i like to point out L's lack of respect for beyond he does admittedly take on the case even when it doesn't quite fit his usual standards (10+ deaths and/or 1 million dollars). he's at least somewhat aware of what his legacy is setting up, though how much he actually gives a shit about any of those kids is somewhat debatable...

[theesteppenwolf]

Some thoughts on Inner Demons

So i have been thinking about this and i do actually like the idea that Lucanis can't have Rook exist in his mind prison because it fucks up his entire inner narrative of basically just self flagellation. "If rook exists then at some point i have to get out" so just delete rook from the scenario. I think that's really good.

However, i think it would've been better if a part of Lucanis actually was trying to get out, at least involuntarily, and that Rook was the personification of that idea, constantly trying to break himself out but ultimately failing. So ''Rook'' exists somewhere in there but is heavily suppressed. That's why Spite seeks real life Rook out. Not to mention that even if not romanced Rook is pretty much the closest person he has at that point, his only other true friend he's had beside Illario so it makes even more sense for them to be this comforting idea he just can't accept fully.

So you see glimpses of Rook, the sound of their voice, or maybe more notes about them, especially if you are romancing him it seems like a big waste of an opportunity to not utilize Rook for a bigger showing of his inner struggle and fear to try and live some kind of life.

The Neve thing is a bit weird when romancing him, i do understand this complaint and the way Spite phrases it does come off as romantic interest specific to her. I think Neve should absolutely stay as both her and Lucanis seem like good friends regardless of romance but it would've been been better (if the player is romancing Lucanis) for Neve to maybe use Lucanis' feelings for Rook against them here. Implying guilt about Rook, leading them on etc. rather than make it specifically about Neve.

There are plenty of little things like this that would make the quest a bit more impactful overall because this is a pretty short quest for something that is essentially meant to be a psychological deep dive into Lucanis. Just more notes and those reworked Neve lines would make it more way more immersive to the player.

In my opinion this should've been a way bigger and more important part of his personal quest, i think they should've really leaned into the whole ''fighting to get him out of his own head'' idea. Adding things like Lucanis' actual memories of Caterina as the abuser she was and moments of genuine brotherly love Lucanis has for Illario. It would've also made up for the fact that you don't learn anything very personal about him the entire game.

Listen, I have whole rewrites to how his personal quest should've gone, it's really my roman empire at this point. This quest is such a good way for Rook to get real vulnerability from him that wouldn't've shown up in real life due to his introverted and closed off nature.

Again my conclusion of Lucanis being a very scraped up character continues as i find my ideas to be pretty easy to come up with implementations for the kind of thing they are trying to pull of in this specific mission.

But oh well, so it goes. Kind of got rambly for a minute there, thank you kindly for reading :P

[fuck-customers]

Jeez a lot of customers need to have lessons in general manners. Adults. Not children. These offenses are repeatedly made by grown adults who are old enough to be my parents, generally 40+.

▪︎If you need to speak to an employee, but that employee is currently on the store phone, unless it is a life-threatening emergency, WAIT for that employee to finish the phone call. I can't tell you how many times I've been on the phone with a customer and an in-store customer thinks whatever they want is more important and starts talking to me while I'm on the phone. I simply ignore them. Be rude, I'll be rude back idgaf.

▪︎If you need to ask an employee something, greet them first so the employee knows that you're talking to them and aren't just on the phone or something. And don't yell your question from across the room. Simply say "excuse me" or "Hi, could you help me please?" Or something similar and when you do that....

▪︎Be polite. Say please and thank you and phrase your requests in the form of a question rather than a demand. Basic kindergarten manners here.

▪︎If you want something from an employee, such as an extra bag or a gift card that the employee may have to retrieve for you, communicate that you want the bag/card/etc. Don't just stand and stare at them. Employees cannot read your mind and are contractually obligated to help you, but will not be able to do so if you don't communicate your needs.

▪︎Keep your opinions about an employee's (and honestly every stranger's) physical appearance to yourself? I shouldn't even have to say this wtf. If you don't like the way someone has dyed their hair or if they have acne or bad makeup, shut the fuck up about it.

▪︎Do not stand in the middle of the aisle and block the entire aisle for customers and employees both, especially not the main aisle. And if you space out and accidentally block the aisle and someone says "excuse me" to try to get past, LISTEN and MOVE.

•If you change your mind on an item in your cart and you don't remember or don't feel like putting it back where it goes, give it to the cashier to put in go-backs. Don't shove it on some random shelf.

•If you knock something over and break or spill it, notify an employee so they can clean it up so no one gets hurt. Retail chains generally don't have "you break it, you buy it" rules.

▪︎The vast majority of employees actually have extremely little control over the store. Problems with inventory, online orders, return policies, etc are not caused by anyone you will ever see working on the sales floor of a retail store. These problems are caused by outside forces, such as corporate or third-party delivery services. Ask an employee for the number of corporate to give your complaint to them if you absolutely must voice your complaints.

▪︎If you ask one employee a question and you receive an answer you don't like, suck it up and move on. Asking a different employee will not get you a different answer, it will just piss the employees off and now you're DEFINITELY not getting whatever it was you wanted.

▪︎Stay the fuck out of employees only areas? Shouldn't have to say this one.

▪︎If you arrive at a store before it opens, stay in your car and wait until the doors are opened. Or go somewhere else until opening time. And do NOT try to force open the doors yourself.

▪︎If you're in a store and it is near closing time, most stores make warning announcements 20-30 minutes before closing time. Listen and follow those announcements. The only reason you should be in a store after closing is if you got in line before closing time and you need to wait for the people in front of you to be rung up.

▪︎Do not go to a store 20 minutes before they close or less.

Posted by admin Rodney

[familyabolisher]

hi!! i hope you’re having a lovely day :-) i really enjoy reading your blog and how you pick apart Things & was wondering if you have any tips and guides for reading and analyzing poetry? ive always struggled w forming coherent thoughts abt poems and would love to know how you approach it. thank you sm for your time ✨

so the big thing that made poetry "click" for me was realising that i was trying to read it the way i might try to read a novel -- identify a discourse taking place, look for points in the text that supplement my argument, construct a position on what the piece is "about" based on these points -- all very undergrad essay-core and frankly a v boring way to think about novels as well, but like, completely mind-numbing when it came to poetry. i think a better approach is to interface with the poem at the level of language and technical construction. i find that it helps a lot to know the technical terms for particular phenomena in the language of poetry, but even without that shorthand knowledge, you'll get a lot out of poetry when you start looking at the choices being made at the level of individual words or even syllables. so instead of asking "what is this poem about?", we can start to ask, for instance:

what is the tone of this poem? is it sparing or loquacious? emotional or detached? asking questions or answering them? what's the vantage point - is this a detached omniscient third-person narrator making observations, or are we as the reader being guided towards a particular perspective on the part of the speaker?

what is the mouthfeel of this poem? can you find any 'shapes' -- any assonance, any internal rhyming, alliteration, anything that causes you to pay attention to particular words, phrasing, etc. why is your attention being called to those moments?

what is the rhythm of the poem? is it free verse -- if so, can you find any points in the piece where more or less attention to rhythm is being paid? why does the line break on this particular word? are the sentences short or long? how is the poet interfacing with their chosen meter? what does this meter lend to the poem? if you're reading multiple works by the same author, compare their use of meter -- do they use the same meter regularly or switch it up, and why were those switches made?

if you can annotate a poem, do so. note down anything which seems linguistically interesting, even if you don't know the "correct" technical word for it -- any clusters of words with similarities whose placement might be interesting (eg. what words are rhymed!), any noteworthy rhythmic discrepancies, placement of line breaks, anything that sticks out. i like to think of reading poetry as a playful exercise -- you're playing around with the words, seeing how they work, enjoying the rhythm and texture of the piece as it comes to you, and trying to construct "a reading" only after the fact.

i think there are times when the reading-for-a-discourse approach can be v helpful and illuminating, but it's best to stumble on those opportunities organically rather than focusing all your energy on trying to answer the "what is this trying to say?" question. if a particular discursive component of a poem sparks your interest (like eg. you read the rime of the ancient mariner and notice how the poem interfaces with contemporaneous abolitionist discourses as well as colonialist ideas about polynesia, just as an example), you've obviously got a compelling hook from which you can anchor a reading, but going in expecting such a reading to jump off the page will often just result in frustration.

this doesn't mean that we don't take the discourse of a poem seriously, or that we don't understand the "rules" of poetry to be postdiscursive phenomena highly contingent on social context. if anything, understanding poetry at a mechanical level opens up significant doors for answering these types of questions -- we can understand, for example, the reactionary nature of the academic revolt against free verse and the desire to return to metered poetry better once we understand the function of form and structure in fascist aesthetics. similarly, spending this kind of time with a poem makes it a lot easier to get a handle on what it might be "about," and what sort of choices are being made to render that "about"ness coherent.

also -- and this is true of anything, including poetry -- if a poet isn't working for you, try reading somebody else. a lot of poets that people will say are good and interesting are neither of those things. poetry has the advantage of being (usually!) a quick read compared to novels, so it's far easier to shop around, read widely, realise what you like and dislike, and engage accordingly.

one of my favourite pieces of literary criticism and examples of the value of this sort of reading practice comes from nabokov's epilogue to lolita, in which he both defends the novel in question against accusations of salacity and speaks very disparagingly of efforts to read a thesis statement into it. he writes:

Every serious writer, I dare say, is aware of this or that published book of his as of a constant comforting presence. Its pilot light is steadily burning somewhere in the basement and a mere touch applied to one’s private thermostat instantly results in a quiet little explosion of familiar warmth. This presence, this glow of the book in an ever accessible remoteness is a most companionable feeling, and the better the book has conformed to its prefigured contour and color the ampler and smoother it glows. But even so, there are certain points, byroads, favorite hollows that one evokes more eagerly and enjoys moretenderly than the rest of one’s book. I have not reread Lolita since I went through the proofs in the spring of 1955 but I find it to be a delightful presence now that it quietly hangs about the house like a summer day which one knows to be bright behind the haze. And when I thus think of Lolita, I seem always to pick out for special delectation such images as Mr. Taxovich, or that class list of Ramsdale School, or Charlotte saying “waterproof,” or Lolita in slow motion advancing toward Humbert’s gifts, or the pictures decorating the stylized garret of Gaston Godin, or the Kasbeam barber (who cost me a month of work), or Lolita playing tennis, or the hospital at Elphinstone, or pale, pregnant, beloved, irretrievable Dolly Schiller dying in Gray Star (the capital town of the book), or the tinkling sounds of the valley town coming up the mountain trail (on which I caught the first known female of Lycaeides sublivens Nabokov). These are the nerves of the novel. These are the secret points, the subliminal co-ordinates by means of which the book is plotted—although I realize very clearly that these and other scenes will be skimmed over or not noticed, or never even reached, by those who begin reading the book under the impression that it is something on the lines of Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure or Les Amours de Milord Grosvit. That my novel does contain various allusions to the physiological urges of a pervert is quite true. But after all we are not children, not illiterate juvenile delinquents, not English public school boys who after a night of homosexual romps have to endure the paradox of reading the Ancients in expurgated versions.

It is childish to study a work of fiction in order to gain information about a country or about a social class or about the author. And yet one of my very few intimate friends, after reading Lolita, was sincerely worried that I (I!) should be living “among such depressing people” —when the only discomfort I really experienced was to live in my workshop among discarded limbs and unfinished torsos.

[bambi-kinos]

Hey!

I was listening to double fantasy today - specifically ‘I’m Losing You’ (heartbreaking song)

In my eyes, very Paul McCartney break up based. But I thought their relationship had been on good terms in 1980, so in your opinion why did John write this song?

Thanks :)

I'm Losing You has always struck me as John's good-bye song to Yoko, nothing to do with Paul. He really did care about her, or what he thought she represented. Letting go of her was a long process. The lines about the stranger's room and the phone always makes my ears perk up because Fred Seaman said that Yoko was constantly on her landline, all day and all night. She barricaded herself inside her office and often slept there so that she didn't have to deal with Sean and John. Yoko had Fred move John's stuff in and out of his room when he left to sail to Bermuda. If he hadn't come up with Double Fantasy, she was planning to divorce him and take him for everything. John knew that or suspected when he came back, I don't see why Fred wouldn't have warned him. I think the song maps to this pretty reliably:

Here in some stranger's room Late in the afternoon What am I doing here at all? Ain't no doubt about it I'm losing you

Yoko moved everything back into John's bedroom as soon as she heard about plans for Double Fantasy but I fully expect John to have known or been warned about what she had done. He knew the room was no longer his.

Somehow the wires have crossed Communication's lost Can't even get you on the telephone Just got to shout about it I'm losing you

One of the reliable ways of contacting Yoko was through her phone which John could use. However she also barricaded herself away from him, sent him to Korean brothels and massage parlors to deny him sex and intimacy, John had a screaming argument with Yoko that was about John not understanding the Japanese staff at their apartment, etc. Even if he called her she wouldn't have picked up. Straight to answering machine!

Well, here in the valley of indecision I don't know what to do I feel you slipping away

John spent a lot of time babbling his head off to Fred about second chances and working at love and relationships etc. To me it's always read as the scared chatter of a man who knew a train was hurtling towards him. Major fear of the unknown and understandably paralyzed by the end of his marriage. I fully believe John wanted to leave Yoko but he was struggling against inertia.

Well now you say you're not getting enough But I remind you of all that bad, bad, bad stuff So what the hell am I supposed to do? Just put a band-aid on it? And stop the bleeding now Stop the bleeding now Well...

Well, well, well I know I hurt you then But hell, that was way back when Well, do you still have to carry that cross? (Drop it!) Don't wanna hear about it I'm losing you

Yoko had many ways of communicating her moods to John and regardless of whether it was good, he was very attuned to her and her desires. I see this phrasing as John finally finding his backbone. He blew up his life for this woman and she never thanked him for it. He was getting sober and getting inspired and was finally telling her to fuck off.

But he's obviously going to have complex feelings towards her despite everything so I'm Losing You is John working through that.

[haru-dipthong]

Ep 12 of my Utena fansub is out!

私たちも今までいろいろやってきた、疲れたわね

We've been so busy the last few episodes. I'm pooped.

A juicy little indulgence on my part here - the fourth wall break here by the shadow girls does not actually exist in the Japanese (explicitly). I’ll explain why I added it.

Here’s a very literal translation of the individual words above with no thought given to context or adjusting for grammar.

We (also) | until now | various different things | have done up to this point

I believe いろいろやってきた (lit. we’ve done various different things up to this point) is referring to their various performances in a sort of meta way. If we take each appearance of the shadow girls as a semi-in-universe mini stage play, this line is referencing the presence of previous plays within the current play. They’ve played pirates, plate spinners, cowboys, an educational program, and more! Acknowledging these things is tantamount to a performer acknowledging the fact that they’re an actor rather than a character while on stage, so the fourth wall break felt appropriate.

Anya was also happy with the fourth wall break and added that it emphasises the episode as a turning point and helps close out the arc, which I really agree with!

-----

また黙秘するわけね。今のウテナってかっこ悪いよ。何か取られた腑抜けみたい。なんだかわからないけど、取られたら取り返しなさいよ！

Are you clamming up again? You look pathetic right now. Like you let someone steal from you! I don’t know what it was, but if someone took something from you, take it back!

Couple of little things to discuss about this line:

かっこ悪い is often translated as “uncool” or “lame”. This can sometimes be accurate, since it’s the opposite of かっこいい (lit. cool), but in this circumstance those words don’t hit hard enough. This かっこ悪い is more barbed than usual, so I kept the barbs by choosing a different word: pathetic.

“Clamming up” was an off the cuff choice because I felt I’d used “be quiet”, “not talk”, etc too many times in the previous scene to reuse them here. I think it fits with Wakaba’s personality and the current situation pretty well! 黙秘 is defined by jisho.org as “remaining silent; keeping secret”.

腑抜け means “coward” or something similar. I tried phrasing this line a few times to get that word in somehow, but in the end the whole rant just read so much better without forcing it in. Also cps (characters per second) was a concern here.

-----

元気な友達がいるね。

Your friend has quite the personality.

元気 (genki). What a word! Often translated as “energetic”. So often in fact, that even before I checked, I knew that the ohtori.nu translation would have used it, and sure enough!

Your friend is very energetic. (from ohtori.nu)

Along with “eyesore” and “confession (of love)”, this might take the bronze medal for common Japanese words that consistently get translated into very uncommon English words.

Of course, 元気 can literally mean “having a lot of energy”, or simply “well” (as in the opposite of “unwell”). But “energetic” is just such a bad translation for it 90% of the time. I wish I could convey why in words, but in most contexts, the word 元気 and the word “energetic” just feel so different.

Anyway, 元気 has quite a positive nuance, which emphasises the passive aggressiveness of Touga’s comment. The intent with this line is that he’s giving a vague compliment to Wakaba, indirectly (talking about her as if she’s not there), and making it clear that he wishes she wasn’t around. Everything else about the line should be secondary, including the specific meanings of each word.

I think this is emblematic of my general approach to translation — to identify the author’s original intent of a line/scene/work and then write it in a different language with the same intent in mind. Every line, every scene, is trying to do something — I believe it’s the translator’s job to identify what each line and scene is supposed to be doing and preserve that, so media literacy is very important. Sometimes that line is doing exposition, in which case a literal translation of each word is often ideal. Sometimes that line is trying to evoke a feeling, establish a character, or make the audience remember similar experiences, in which case the individual words used matter much less. In this case, the line is attempting to invoke memories of similar experiences of passive aggressive, dismissive comments. And frankly, “Your friend is very energetic” does not do that, so I consider it a poor translation.

-----

Thanks as always to my ride or die @dontbe-lasanya for their awesome editing this episode (and every episode!)

Make sure to follow the blog for episodes as they're released. Go here for all previous episodes:

[kinkmanor-too]

When are you coming back?

I am sorry for being away for so long. I needed a creative break from my posting. I found another creative outlet for a while (it rhymes with stick-stock). But that recently took a sour turn for me (I’ll get into that later).

So I think it is time to welcome you and my followers and fans back to the hedonistic delights of Kink Manor. It is time to embrace kink and sexuality and nudism/body celebration & confidence and BDSM fun once again and open the doors of Kink Manor to all the beautiful, sexy, horny folks of Tumblr.

There will be some rules and protocols that I’m going to follow for how I run Kink Manor and how I might potentially interact with you.

1) I post a wide variety of nudity, body types, sexuality & orientation, kinks, etc. I don’t intend that everything is what turns me on but much of it does. Kink Manor is open to, accepting of, celebrates and encourages just about everything. If you don’t like it, keep scrolling. You’ll find something you like. Still don’t like it? Move on and don’t return. I’m not accepting critiques or discussions of content. This is my world and I am The Lord ‘O the Manor and what I say/do is the law. Anger or frustrate me and you’ll be banned.

2) I welcome submissions and I welcome DM conversations. You just might learn something about me or my personal adventures. And I hope to learn about you.

3) However, I will not respond to DM messages that start with “hi” or “hello” or any one word or one short phrase. I have seen EVERY scam and scheme on tumblr and elsewhere. I know your scripts. No…you’ll never get truly personal info from me. No…you’ll never know where I live. No…you’ll never know my real name. No…you’ll never get a true picture of my face (of my naked body or of some of my sex adventures maybe 😈). I do NOT tolerate anyone trying to play a game or run a scam.

3b) No…you’ll never get money from me: DON’T ASK. No…I’m not a submissive or a sissy or anything along those lines. Do not approach me as such. If you are a dominant (female or male) and wish to have a discussion about kink and D/s play, I’ll be happy to talk to you. But don’t try a power play on me. You’ll find out my ultimate power to block you from access to me or Kink Manor.

3c) NO. I will not go to any other platform, WhatsApp, telegram, zangi, Gtalk/Google workspace, FaceTime, whatever to talk with you. If you don’t want to chat on tumblr DM, don’t message me.

3d) No, I’m not going to buy your content. This is pretty simple and straightforward. Please don’t ask. I have absolutely nothing against you trying to earn money (or even a living) as a sex worker and selling pics, videos, and more. If you can make it work, that is great. For me, personally, I can find more than my fill of freely available content. So I will always decline to buy your content.

3e) No, I do not meet up with someone I just met on tumblr. And No, I won’t pay for sex. Tumblr is not a dating or a hook up app. Please don’t use it as such. I’m not looking for anything here other than blogs that have content that either gets me off or that I can use as a post for Kink Manor.

4) You are welcome and encouraged to reblog from Kink Manor. I love that acknowledgement of what I do here. DO NOT REBLOG AND REMOVE MY CAPTION! If you reblog and remove my caption, I will not follow your blog. You’re free to go find some other reblog of the content from someone else’s blog but do not remove my captions.

5) I do not tolerate smoking, vaping, or drug use in my real life and I will not post anything that includes those activities. Also I won’t follow your blog and I may block your blog. I’ve seen too many lives destroyed by those things and I won’t give a voice to them here.

6) You don’t want your content on my blog. That is ok. I totally understand. But be polite. Send me a DM message asking for a post to be removed. Include a link to the post you want removed and I’ll take care of it. Be rude or an asshole about it and it may go a way that you do not intend. Remember this is my world and I will react according to the demeanor of my guests.

All of that being said…

Welcome back to Kink Manor. Take off your clothes, get comfortable, and let your fantasies fly free. I’m thankful for all of you who visit, follow, like, and reblog. 😈🔥🔥

[artist-issues]

Vignette is my favorite song on Clancy.

He goes “to me, the song makes the most sense when viewed through the lens of addiction.” And everybody responded to that like “omg TYLER what’s he addicted to??”

Like they’ve never heard that from him before.

There’s literally a whole song about going through cycles of addiction and what’s he addicted to, ladies and gentleman—

Doubt.

He’s addicted to doubting God. That whole bridge of the song is the literal point of the Bible verse James 1:6 “But let him ask in faith, with no doubting, for the one who doubts is like a wave of the sea that is driven and tossed by the wind.”

It’s…it’s all over his songs. It’s all over that one interview with Apple Music where he explains he doesn’t know how to talk about his faith yet, so does he really believe it if he can’t talk about it, etc.

In Vignette he describes what he’s been doing over and over, the dark addictive thing, like this:

“Fresh off a binger in the woods

flesh, covered in bites

testing what is real, what is good,

Man, it’s been a long night.”

Break it down. Tyler chose to describe a location. Didn’t have to. But because he did, you can get something from that. He’s in the woods. Woods? Trees. “Why won't you speak / Where I happen to be? / Silent in the trees / Standing cowardly.” Standing in the woods, out there alone, looking for something out of the ordinary and dramatic to happen, to alleviate his feelings, to give him proof that God exists.

That is the place he goes to wrestle with that.

Next line. His state is having flesh that is covered in bites. Mmkay, he’s used zombie imagery before. Heavydirtysoul: “Mindless zombies walking around with a limp and a hunch/ Saying stuff like, ‘you only live once’ /“ Zombies are people who don’t think about where life came from or where it’s going; they just shuffle around, not moving well through life, based on a ‘hunch (a feeling or guess based on no known facts.) They’re dead, pretending to be alive, mindless. That kind of crowd, or even that kind of mindset, has been chewing away at the songwriter. Getting covered by something so dark sounds a lot like the phrase “swallowed by the vignette.”

What’s covered in bites? Flesh. Only one other place where he’s used that word. Holding Onto You: “I’m taking over my body, back in control, no more shoddy / I’ve fought it a lot and it seems a lot like flesh is all I’ve got / not anymore, flesh out the door, swat /

I could say a lot about that song and the different meanings behind the word choice of “flesh,” but suffice it to say, it sounds just like Romans 7, (I don’t care, read all that scripture, it’s life-giving.)

"For we know that the Law is spiritual, but I am of flesh, sold into bondage to sin. For what I am doing, I do not understand; for I am not practicing what I would like to do, but I am doing the very thing I hate. But if I do the very thing I do not want to do, I agree with the Law, confessing that the Law is good. So now, no longer am I the one doing it, but sin which dwells in me. For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh; for the willing is present in me, but the doing of the good is not. For the good that I want, I do not do, but I practice the very evil that I do not want. But if I am doing the very thing I do not want, I am no longer the one doing it, but sin which dwells in me. I find then the principle that evil is present in me, the one who wants to do good. For I joyfully concur with the law of God in the inner man, but I see a different law in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin which is in my members. Wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from the body of this death?" 

The flesh is biblically at war with the Spirit, in a Christian. It’s the sinful urges and lifestyle, which have been defeated in Christ, but are still weighing us down and tempting us until He comes back. I’m not saying “doubt” is always a fleshly thing. I’m saying: addiction is always a fleshly thing—it’s laboring under the authority and control of something that is not Christ. Usually we are talking about addiction to a substance. But it can also be addiction to a mindset.

Doubt or ‘losing your faith’ or whatever can sound real romantic. But actually you know what, when you’re doubting, you get to stall. You get to say ‘well I’m not sure’ so you quit moving. You quit trusting, so you quit obeying. That aspect of it can be less daunting than the alternative—so it can be appealing. I don’t have to obey and do hard things if I’m not sure of the one giving orders. I can sit in uncertainty; that can be the slightly less scary hard-thing that I choose.

So. The flesh—the evil part of him that is already dead in Christ, but he keeps putting it on like a snake trying to fit in old shed skin—is what the zombies—the mindless, pretending to be alive mindset—are feeding on. And they’re doing all this while he’s out in the woods—where he normally goes to puzzle out whether or not God is who He says He is.

He’s putting back on that nasty old skin that doesn’t belong on him anymore. He’s going out where his only company is the undead, mindless-pretending-to-be-alive. And he’s doing what?

“Testing what is real, what is good.” Oh. Romans 2:12. “Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect.”

He’s using this phrase, but not like the Bible does. And that’s intentional. He uses the phrase incorrectly, to show how using it incorrectly is the problem.

He’s cutting out the fact that the testing is supposed to be for “discerning what is the will of God.” That’s the context, that’s the motive that is safe to base testing on. But he’s not operating in that correct, safe space. And he adds “what is real” to “what is good.”

When you take out “figuring out God’s will” but then you add in “what’s even real?” you’re saying, “I’m not sure God is even real, so nevermind about His will—let ME figure out what is good.” You’re not going to find “what is good” on those terms. Without Him, when He is in your category for ‘might not be real,’ when you remove Him from the equation, who’s to say what’s good? Anybody. Nobody. So “good” doesn’t exist. That’s zombie-thinking, right there. The absence of sense. Mindlessness.

Now factor in what I said above. That interview with Apple Music. “If I don’t know how to talk about it, do I really believe it?” Add in a dash of “Clear.” “Cleverly masking your words /“ Put in the whole entire character of Blurryface, who cares what everyone thinks and can’t be “clear.”

Vignette is just another chapter in the same old story. Tyler Joseph isn’t always 100% sure God is who He says He is. And at his worst, in his flesh, he cares more about what you think than he does the truth…so he can’t be clear about what he believes.

“Man, it’s been a long night.” Yeah. It has.

[asherlockstudy]

What do you think of the line "I imagine John Watson thinks love’s a mystery to me, but the chemistry is incredibly simple and very destructive." Particularly the first half-

The following metas provide the context for an easier interpretation of this scene.

Why was Sherlock so emotional in the last scene with Irene? Why Sherlock isn't really sexually oblivious What did Sherlock feel for Irene?

With this phrase Sherlock sort of provides the answer to the mystery: what made him miscalculate and fall for Irene's / Moriarty's trap. Throughout the whole episode, Sherlock was observing John and secondarily Mycroft worry about his emotional state. They both considered him an amateur victim of the very experienced dominatrix, who fell for her straight away. John was asking Mrs Hudson about his romantic history, then in his secret conversation with Irene he was worried that he was a person completely inexperienced in romantic matters who immediately fell in the deep waters and was tricked by Irene, he considered him oblivious about how others - such as Molly and himself - felt. He scanned the whole house to check for drugs in case Sherlock relapsed due to Irene's seeming death. John was not understanding Sherlock. He thought he was new to love and entirely vulnerable to it because of the Woman.

Sherlock, however, who is not anywhere near as amateurish or oblivious as John likes to think he is a) had picked on all the concerns John secretly had and b) had figured John had completely misunderstood how he felt.

His speculation "I imagine John Watson thinks love is a mystery for me..." is proven true a little later when John tells Mycroft he doesn't think "Sherlock feels things this way". John wavered between two interpretations; that Sherlock was vulnerable because of the Woman or that he didn't feel love at all in a conventional way.

We and Sherlock both knew that John was wrong either way. Sherlock WAS vulnerable but it was because of John. He unintentionally betrayed Mycroft's plans to Moriarty in his rush to impress John and not Irene.

(GIF Source: deducingbbcsherlock)

Sherlock, hurt due to another evidence of the danger of loving yet determined to not disclose his weakness to Mycroft and Irene, continues: "... but the chemistry is incredibly simple and very destructive." He is now the cold chemist again, breaking down emotions to their substantial fundamentals, the love hormones; dopamine, serotonin, oxytocin, endorphins etc. But just like Irene couldn't resist the rush of excitement in keeping a Sherlock related password in her most prized object under Sherlock's nose, Sherlock could not resist the dopamine rush once he left John speechless with his skills and brilliance again. This is tragically totally a mystery to John and even to the two other people in the room. But we the viewers were told to look for the proof, when he brought up John seemingly out of nowhere:

"I imagine John Watson thinks love is a mystery to me but the chemistry is incredibly simple and very destructive" AKA

John thinks I don't understand love but I understand it all too well and it's because of it that I nearly destroyed my brother's career.

[goodvibesandmemes]

MOVIE MEMES: “The Princess Bride” (1987) 🏰👸🏽🤺 ↳ Please feel free to tweak them etc.

Themes: swords, fighting, violence, magic, weapons, fantasy, war, medieval-like era, friendship, death, epic battles, blades

“Life is pain, Highness. Anyone who says differently is selling something.” “I do not mean to pry, but you don't by any chance happen to have six fingers on your right hand?” “Let me put it this way, have you ever heard of Plato, Aristotle, Socrates? Morons.” “Never go in against a Sicilian when death is on the line!” “There was a mighty duel.” “You’ve been mostly dead all day.” “Hear this now: I will always come for you.” “I just want you to feel you're doing well. I hate for people to die embarrassed.” “My way's not very sportsman-like.” “I have been in the revenge business so long, now that it's over, I don't know what to do with the rest of my life.” “You mean you'll put down your rock and I'll put down my sword, and we'll try and kill each other like civilized people?” “You mock my pain.” “When I was your age, television was called books.” “I'll explain and I'll use small words so that you'll be sure to understand, you warthog-faced buffoon.” “You seem a decent fellow. I hate to kill you.” “Nonsense. You're only saying that because no one ever has.” “Anybody want a peanut?” “That may be the first time in my life a man has dared insult me.” “Since the invention of the kiss there have been five kisses that were rated the most passionate, the most pure. This one left them all behind.” “You be careful. People in masks cannot be trusted.” “Inconceivable!” “Get some rest. If you haven’t got your health, then you haven’t got anything.” “This is true love. You think this happens every day?” “[name], tear his arms off.” “I don't think I'm quite familiar with that phrase.” “You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.” “It's not that bad! Well, I'm not saying I'd like to build a summer home here, but the trees are actually quite lovely.” “Why won't my arms move?” “You're trying to kidnap what I've rightfully stolen.” “I always think that everything could be a trap, which is why I'm still alive.” “Rest well and dream of large women.” “Rodents of Unusual Size? I don't think they exist.” “I want my father back, you son of a bitch.” “You seem a decent fellow. I hate to die.” “Your vote of confidence is overwhelming.” “It's not my fault being the biggest and the strongest. I don't even exercise.” “My name is [name]. You killed my father. Prepare to die.” “You can’t hurt me. [name] and I are joined by the bonds of love. And you cannot track that, not with a thousand bloodhounds, and you cannot break it, not with a thousand swords.” “There’s a shortage of perfect breasts in the world. It would be a pity to damage yours.” “You mean you wish to surrender to me? Very well, I accept.” “Beat it, or I'll call the Brute Squad.” “I killed you too quickly the last time. A mistake I don't mean to duplicate tonight.” “Truly, you have a dizzying intellect.” “Let me explain. No, there is too much. Let me sum up.” “Oh no, it's just that they're terribly comfortable. I think everyone will be wearing them in the future.” “As you wish.” “We'll never succeed. We may as well die here.” “I can’t compete with you physically, and you’re no match for my brains.” “I've never worked for so little. Except once, and that was a very noble cause.” “I think you're bluffing.”

[mdhwrites]

In your opinion does "The Owl House" have any re-watch value? Does the story, characters, characterization, writing, etc. hold up over repeated viewings or is the show played out after the first time through the series?

So I want to acknowledge that this is actually an awkward question. Not with how you phrased it or anything just... Period? Because whether something is rewatchable will mostly come down to personal taste and enjoyment. Some people find Horror movies to be great fun to rewatch while others may not see the point because you already know all the scare moments or answers to creeping dread. Some might find action movies exciting to rewatch while others need the novelty of a first rewatch. As such, my answer is very much so is going to be biased by the fact that I ended up not liking the show.

But... I broke essentially on rewatch in a way. A lot of people have shattered on TOH essentially from having to reconcile what it says versus what it does. A lot of this because TOH constantly kicks payoffs down the line and hints at potential it will reach. It is constantly making the journey suffer for the promise of a grand finale. And, well... A lot of people have agreed that the shortening did not force their hand to break multiple themes in the finale, or take Amity's character or a bunch of other things that bloated the series and never got a proper payoff, such as the Collector.

This format of TOH I think is actually what makes it so hard to rewatch unless you are the ultimate fan of it who will notice nothing. S1 is labeled as boring, a complaint I even agree with as someone who mostly likes S1 still. It spends the most time setting up plot lines though in episodes that are a pretty safe seven out of ten, or worse. Amity episodes can escape this problem decently often, being fun in their own right, but that's why the fandom only acts like half, at best, of S1 even exists. Most of it is easily forgotten because it's very forgettable. Not like in a S1 of Amphibia way where it's all so much fun but also so much of it that they can blur and be hard to separate but just in a "I just wasted 20 minutes of my life watching an okay kids cartoon" way. The only thing that helped those episodes not feel that way was this idea that it was building towards something with these characters.

And... After the shock of things like the Lumity Kiss being real, I don't think S2 holds up for being the majority of those payoffs. Amity and Willow? One of the most explicitly kicked cans? Seen interacting on the same side before either addresses the "We're not friends' thing because of Eclipse Lake, so that's pre-shortening and they still didn't decide to address and then address it badly. Luz's magic is wrapped in a plotline she's not a part of and has no real reaction to even. It's just "Oh, we're just making bullshit up now instead of finding glyphs? K." Amity's parents are wrapped up, in the same episode, early S2, in a very similar way where Amity is barely a part of that episode but now her core angst and excuse for being a bad person? Dealt with and out of the way, at least until they randomly decide to try and say Alador TOOOOOTALLY wasn't a bad guy. That he hated Odalia too. Totally doesn't contradict literally everything that came before, something that would be much more sharply noticed on a binge rewatch. Like... It cannot be understated that by the point most plot threads in TOH wrap up, they were introduced and left to rot for so long that half the time, the fandom was starting to get UPSET during the runtime for the lack of any exploration or conclusion. Long hiatuses didn't help but at its core, even when it was running people were wondering when we would get satisfying answers to thing and rarely were they happy about it.

I think this is a core part of why ONLY the shipping community seems to have clung to TOH. That or people who are exploring the show's missed potential with characters like Belos or the Blights. The fandom has had to either commit to the one thing TOH did do well, its shipping (that comes with so many fucking asterisks) and its potential baiting. But the latter also means you have to recognize why it failed in the process of doing your exploration of the work.

So will some people enjoy rewatching it? Of course. There are people who probably like rewatching the AtLA movie though because the die hards are die hards. Do I think from a casual perspective you get much out of rewatching a random episode, let alone binging the series again?

No. I just think disappointment that the main series will leave you, which will eventually no longer be tempered by the reputation of it having been shortened, will only get worse. It is not a tale worth seeing again, so I hope I see you in the next one.

======+++++======

I have a public Discord for any and all who want to join!

I also have an Amazon page for all of my original works in various forms of character focused romances from cute, teenage romance to erotica series of my past. I have an Ao3 for my fanfiction projects as well if that catches your fancy instead. If you want to hang out with me, I stream from time to time and love to chat with chat.

A Twitter you can follow too

And a Kofi if you like what I do and want to help out with the fact that disability doesn’t pay much.

[marta-bee]

This story from @eilinelsghost really and truly blew me away. I don't want to say too much for risk of spoiling it (for he that breaks a thing to see how it works, etc. etc.), but by way of summary, it involves Finarfin and Finrod being reunited after Finrod's death and re-incarnation, and it is every bit as intense as a fic would need to be to do that moment really, really well.

I mean: damn.

Aside from that, I think it's pretty well known in these parts that my two big fandoms are Tolkien and Sherlock Holmes. What I've maybe made less obvious is I relate to these fandoms in pretty different ways, and this fic helped me understand why.

Tolkien is the one fandom I've ever really felt driven to write for, though I don't read it much these days. Whereas Sherlock Holmes, Sherlock especially, I love to read but feel so little drive to actually write in. And I think it's because with Sherlock, there are these great fun characters and so many people still writing in this really accessible, relaxing writing style. Also, canon really did do quite a few of us Johnlockers horribly wrong. Slipping back into that world is like slipping into a warm bath at the end of a long day. But there's not this metaphysical grist the way there is with the Silmarillion especially, and the way my brain works, there's nothing to work out the same way.

And writing is hard. It takes me months often as not, and while I love being on the other side of a good story-telling, the getting-there process is quite grueling. Even the wordcrafting, the turns-of-phrase, I really love writing a character that demands that and whose character demands it. Mycroft, maybe. Denethor, certainly. But more and more, with Sherlock stories, the kind of stories I feel like I should be writing there just don't seem to spring naturally from the canon.

Then I read this gem and got a glimpse of what I was yearning for. It's the archaic language, I think, and the way that other-ness just really, really serves the theme I think the author is aiming for. It's gloriously told on its own, but it's also not (to borrow a line from Hitchhiker's Guide) not just some guys, you know? It's almost like Finrod and Finarfin are characters almost (but not quite) elevated to archetypes so we can play around with what it means to be reembodied in Arda Marred, in a way a philosophical treatise never quite could.

Doesn't mean the story itself doesn't pack a punch. This is plunge the dagger in and twist it around while you're in there why don't you? level angst, and I do mean that as the best compliment.

As I said: damn.

To the extent I'm in a place to make New Year's resolutions, I'd say this makes me want to reread the Silm and maybe write some Tolkien fic of my own again. That wanting is the highest compliment I can muster. Whether I can actually do that is an open question (I'm both tired and very busy with RL), but the desire is real.

Seriously, Silmarillion fans, if you've gotten this far and are still reading me please go and read the thing. For a oneshot especially, it packed an utterly ridiculous amount of wallop.

Sherlockians, don't worry, I'm not going anywhere. But sometimes, game just has to take a moment to recognize game.