#evidence of flaws that almost got her killed and beheaded

[vikingnerd793]

I agree with the reblog completely. I think self-preservation, especially as a slave, can't be inherently seen as selfish or gray. 99.999% of humans have an instinct toward self-preservation. Instinct to survive. So I am not taking something from her character over it.

That does not make her anything less than good.

And, burying negative emotions and trauma? Why wouldn't she when she has no choice ? They're on borrowed time against a very, very dangerous evil that could end everything and everyone. She could die at any moment. Hard to process that trauma and anger and pain when you only have so much time and energy and you're scared you'll lose focus when so much depends on you. Again, not selfish. Self-preservation. She doesn't owe us the bearing of her soul, just because we personally want to see her do that. It comes out at the time she feels like she has a second to process and breathe, and...rightfully so... none of her companions blame her for the wave of emotions in that moment.

She is chaotic good. She is not perfect ....I don't think anyone makes that claim, given how much she loves violence...but she also is not, and I say this with emphasis, anywhere near evil.

Also, The cinnamon roll thing someone mocked fans for in the reblogs? That is literally how she behaves toward those she cares about. And that's OK for people to appreciate that.

Karlach isn't a good girl

Listen, LISTEN. I love her, okay? Now that's out of the way. I see many people reducing her personality to the "big friendly labrador dog" thing. And while it's cute and all that, I disagree. Let me get into why I think Karlach isn't the goodie nice girl she puts a lot of effort to be. She has just returned to Faerun when we meet her in game, and she IS trying her bestest to start anew, to be the best version of herself now that she is free. But it doesn't mean she was always like that, or that her past has not changed her. I think it did - quite a lot, in fact.

Let's start with Gortash. She worked for this fucker. Granted, she might not have known he was such an evil bastard at the time, but she was his bodyguard. And by bodyguard, it is implied that she was his bully, his enforcer and debt collector - you know, the kind that breaks knees and kills people. When she meets an old friend in the city, that friend asks her if she is still in "the business of intimidation", and offers her to come see weapons. Even though Karlach, in her mind, might have been convincing herself that doing such a job was to help someone she respected, she still did it. And that is FINE. She was a young orphan, a tiefling in a place where tieflings are discriminated against harshly, poor and without much perspective. Of course a guy coming over offering her a well paid job that she excelled in would seem like winning a lottery. Still, she was a pretty shady violent person doing it. Now, the Hells. Avernus. She was sold to Zariel quite young still, and went through all sorts of torture and other perks enslavement gets you. For 10 years. She was scared shitless while there, especially in the beginning - she says so herself (to Halsin). All the carnage she inflicted was not (very) voluntary. She HAD to, or she would be the one getting killed. But she enjoyed it - or grew to. She likes violence, the adrenaline of it, the rush of excitement. The thrill of it, she says, is second only to sex.

Continuing on. Avernus, as well as the other layers of the Nine Hells, is not like the Material Plane. The place itself influences you. It means that being in Avernus for any time changes/corrupts/influences who you are. The longer you stay there, the deeper it gets. It did so to Zariel who was a literal angel. Avernus (and it's Archdevil's personality) insidiously get in your body and heart. It is just the way it goes, lore-wise, in DnD. If a fucking SOLAR wasn't immune to it, Karlach - young and lost - certainly wouldn't be either. Even more so because she was near Zariel all the time. I strongly believe Karlach was getting more and more exactly like Zariel - who herself is a fierce berserker warrior who charges head first into battle. Zariel is KNOWN to be this crazy strong, insane, fearless and (in her mind) righteous demon-smiting war machine. Sounds similar to a nice red tiefling we know, doesn't it? Now, did Zariel chose Karlach beause she was already like this, or did Karlach took after Zariel while she fought with her? Hard to tell. In any case, Karlach's 10 years in the Hells did change her. Needless to say, Avernus doesn't change you for the better. It doesn't mean that Karlach became "evil" - she is obviously far from it. But she is chaotic, violent and bloodthirsty. She is also selfish. There are several situations where this personality trait of her comes up.

It may sound kinda wild considering how she offers to help everyone and even sacrifice herself (since she's already dying anyway) - when we meet her. But that's the thing: she is being as selfless as she can now because she has been very selfish for a very long time (proof she has a conscience). Perhaps, she is terrified of what she was becoming and is trying to make amends, to revert whatever evil was growing in her.

She mentions herself that she did not help the tieflings of Elturel when their city was pulled down into Avernus. She did not get out of her way to help them. Instead, she thought that if "she was living that nightmare, they'd have to live it too". She would not put her neck on the line to help another - which, not so coincidentally, is typical behavior in the Hells (again, proof that Avernus was indeed getting to her). The Hag's Vicious Mockery targeted specifically at Karlach mentions how she is willing to "sell everyone's soul's if it means she can save hers". We do not know exactly what it refers to - soul coins, throwing others under the bus, ignoring people in need - but it reinforces the idea that Karlach was not the nicest person for at least 12+ years. Granted, the devils around her were much worse - but they are DEVILS in HELL. So.

Generally, in game we notice that her effort to survive and stay alive has pushed her selfishness to grow. But it still is selfishness. Another example is how she disapproves (together with Astarion), if you say to healer Nettie that you "swear to drink the Wyvern poison". She wouldn't drink it. She'd rather kill Nettie (that gets hostile).

Another hint at her grey-ish personality is when she talks to/about Wyll after he is punished by Mizora for not having killed Karlach. She mentions that she would NOT have done the same in his place. That he was better than her. Again, she would not put her skin on the line like that. She would and has turned a blind eye to situations and persons if it meant it would guarantee her survival or avoid injury. (Mind you, I 100% belive she would do this sacrifice if she was in love with someone, though.)

She will ask to, and will use Soul Coins even though she knows it's morally a sus choice to do so. If you play as her she will repeat to herself "I won't use them, they are people's souls - and I am GOOD." like she is trying to convince herself. Because she would fucking use them to smash some big fuckers in a blink - and feel awesome while doing it. Even as her, she keeps insisting "But... maybe I can use them... JUST when I really need them." Additionally, when she talks to the bugbear merchant in Moonrise Towers and he offers her soul coins, she doesn't really feel guilty for the stories of the souls in them. She even says at some point "they are already doomed, so why not use them anyway", justifying that she will only kill evil bastards with them. In any case, the morality of her choice is debatable. It makes clear that Karlach is not "lawful good" by any stretch.

Let me reiterate that just because I am saying all this about Karlach, doesn't mean I dislike her. I think she is abso-fucking-lutely the best character in the game. But I hate to see her personality "flattened" to nice happy go lucky gal. I think she has a grey-tinged personality - she has good and bad aspects to herself; she has character flaws too.

But I also think that she is trying her damn hardest to be the best she can be right then. The opposite of what she's been. Maybe it is because she has so little time left, that she needs to be the absolute best version of herself while she can. Perhaps she is trying to be what she would have been if her parents did not die - because they seemed like great loving parents. And I think Karlach didn't turn into a broken evil maniac because of them, the way they raised her while they were alive. But she lost her mom at 6, her father around 13-15. After that, it was struggling on the streets, Gortash and Zariel - betrayal, violence, carnage, war and loneliness. It is too naive to think a person would not change after all this, that Karlach would not carry more scars than those she shows on her body. To her credit, she turned much MUCH better than anyone would have. She WILL kill with a grin on her face, seek violence, blood and even revel in it - she learned to relish it and now it's part of who she is. She is selfish, she will look out for herself and has no qualms about killing or throwing people she doesn't care for under the bus (if she sees justification for it). BUT she knows what evil is, and doesn't let shit happen to people who don't deserve it. She will side with those who suffer prejudice and fight against what she sees as injustice - but even she has a limit to how far she'd go.

If you raid the Emerald Grove, she will leave the party. To me, this screams of her trying to right her past wrongs. She left the Elturians to their fate once before, so she MUST save them now that she has another chance - and that it won't cost her her life. I love her being 1/3 brutal killing machine (and fucking LOVING it), 1/3 ptsd, fear and overcompensating trauma under a smile, and 1/3 just trying her best, really, and being lovely for it. Phew. That was a long rant. I guess I just wanted to organize my thoughts about it a bit :V

[scotianostra]

23rd August 1305 saw the trial and execution in London of Sir William Wallace, one time Guardian of Scotland.

I posted yesterday stating the trial happened then, it came u in a source I was reading about Wallace, sometimes the historians can get it wrong, but the post yesterday served as more of prelude and a taster of todays more detailed one. Wallace is said to have accepted his execution without resistance and a brave heart. He even made a final confession to a priest and read from the book of Psalms before his punishment.

Types of execution at The Elms ranged from burning at the stake (for heretics) to the tried and tested hanged-drawn-and-quartered method for those convicted of high treason. For those unfamiliar with this method, it involves being dragged by a horse to the place of execution, hanged  until almost dead, then disembowelled whilst still conscious, beheaded, and finally being chopped into four pieces (i.e. ‘quartered) and subsequently having these pieces put on display across the city, or in Sir William Wallace’s case, the country.

I think it only right to give a background post about Sir William Wallace so hang on to your hats, there’ll be no mention of French Princess’s, Blue painted Australians or the like. 

Much of what we know about Wallace comes from  Blind Harry, also known as Harry, Hary or Henry the Minstrel, is renowned as the author of The Actes and Deidis of the Illustre and Vallyeant Campioun Schir William Wallace, more commonly known as The Wallace. The trouble is how reliable can Blind Harry’s account be, it was written over 150 years after Wallace's grisly demise, the stories about oor erstwhile hero would have been handed down through  word of mouth, possibly even in song. 

Harty claims that Wallace's father was named Malcolm, and on this basis Wallace has traditionally been identified as Sir Malcolm Wallace, a minor landowner from Renfrewshire. Sir Malcolm was a descendant of Richard Wallace, a native of the lordship of Oswestry on the Welsh border, (Wallace itself meaning Welshman),  who first came to Scotland in the twelfth-century in the service of Walter Fitz Alan, first High Steward of Scotland. This Stewart connection has also been used by historians to explain Wallace's place in the 'patriotic' struggle of the 1290s.

But  Harry’s story has some flaws, now I’m not decrying the story, just some details like his age.

No reliable evidence exists to gives us an estimate of his age. Harry claims that Wallace was 'forty and five [years] of age' when he was executed,  but also states that he was 'bot eighteen yer auld' shortly before the Battle of Stirling Bridge, which would place the year of his birth around 1278/9.

It shows how difficult it is to build a picture of Sir William.

The contemporary English chronicler William Rishanger implies that Wallace was a young man when he emerged as the leader of armed resistance to the English in southern Scotland in 1297, but this does little to narrow things down. According to Hary, Wallace was raised by his two uncles - both clerics - who saw to his education after his father was killed by an English knight named Fenwick

 One of his uncles was from Dunipace, a wee town not far from my home in Falkirk, it is through this uncle we get an oft quoted phrase  “This is the truth I tell you: of all things freedom’s most fine. Never submit to live, my son, in the bonds of slavery entwined.” The second pic shows part of the quote, it is on a paving stone on Falkirk High Street  that I often walk past.

He does seem to have had two brothers, Malcolm - who would provide Wallace with much-needed support in the later part of his career - and John - who would later be executed for supporting Robert Bruce after 1306. His activities before 1297 are also uncertain, but they may have been less than wholesome. Contemporary English accounts describe him as a 'brigand' and a 'thief', suggesting he may have lived outside the law even before the English invaded. Of course, these may simply be attempts by hostile writers to blacken his reputation. However, a legal document of August 1296 mentions 'a thief, one William le Waleys' as an accomplice of a cleric named Matthew of York who had in June of that year been convicted of robbery at Perth. This could well be our William.

Again I am not trying to blacken his character, I am merely pointing out the difficult job that historians have when piecing together his life. 

Whatever the details of his early life, following the English invasion of 1296 that Wallace first emerged into the mainstream of Scottish affairs in a big way. The death of King Alexander III in 1286, followed by the death of his granddaughter Margaret of Norway in 1290, had provoked a major succession crisis in Scotland. Efforts to settle the ongoing dispute between the competing Balliol and Bruce factions had led to increasing English interference in the governance of Scotland, culminating in a full-scale invasion of the kingdom in 1296. I’ve covered all this in posts regarding King John Balliol, the sacking of Berwick and  the first Battle of Dunbar all in 1296.

One of Wallace’s first encounters with the English is told in typically dramatic form by Blind Harry, the story goes that William was fishing  when he is accosted by five soldiers in the service of 'lorde Persye'  Henry Percy, 1st Baron Percy who was the warden of Galloway and Ayrshire .  The honest, unsuspecting Wallace offers them some of his fish so long as they leave the rest for his uncle - 'ane agyt knycht' - Wallace hopes to feed, but the soldiers demand all of his fish and attack him when he refuses them. Remarkably, Wallace disarms the first attacker using only a 'poutstaff' ('fishing pole'), seizes the discarded sword, kills two of the soldiers, severs the hand of another, and chases the survivors off! 

The earliest confirmed encounter between Wallace and the English administration occurred in May 1297, when Wallace and a small band of supporters killed William Heselrig, the English sheriff of Lanark, shortly before an assize was due to be held in the town. According to the indictment against him in 1305, Wallace and his men also dismembered Helelrig's corpse. Famously, Hary claims that Wallace's attack on Heselrig was in retribution for the killing of Wallace's wife - Marion Braidfute, as Harry identifies her. 

It is apparent from contemporary English accounts of the incident at Lanark that it proved to be a powerful recruiting tool for Wallace's rebellion. As Walter Guisborough put it, 'the common folk of the land followed him as their leader and ruler; the retainers of the great lords adhered to him; and even though the lords themselves were present with the English king in body, at heart they were on the opposite side'.

What I find remarkable is that the killing of the soldiers and then Heselrig kickstarted, the uprising against Edwards army and around 4 months Wallace and Andrew de Moray had assembled a combined army of over 6 thousand troops that ambushed the English as they crossed the Forth at Stirling.

Before Stirling we also had the capitulation of the Nobility at Irvine, I have also covered this in a previous post.

In the wake of the Scottish victory at Stirling Bridge, the English administration in Scotland all but collapsed. The Scots were once again able to form a government of their own, and at its head - now as Guardians of Scotland - were Wallace and Murray, although Murray's tenure was cut short when he died - probably of wounds sustained at Stirling Bridge - in November.

This was the zenith of Wallace's career. He had emerged from obscurity to the very summit of Scottish society, all in the space of a year. It also meant he had a price on his head and was the most wanted man in Scotland.

Edward I returned from the Continent in March 1298 and set his sights on Scotland, he marched with an army North in late June and quickly discovered that Wallace's response to the threat had been to devastate southern Scotland and withdraw with his army out of reach of the English. A bitter and frustrating campaign followed, with Edward almost abandoning the chase altogether. However, in late July Edward got wind that the Scots had been sighted near Falkirk, and hurriedly moved his army to meet them. 

Precisely why the confrontation at Falkirk happened is, as with so much of Wallace's career, uncertain. Until this point in the campaign Wallace had carefully avoided the English army, a prudent strategy that would later pay off for the Scots under Bruce. Guisborough claims that Wallace had learned that Edward planned to withdraw and hoped to attack the English in the rear. This would at least explain why Wallace so suddenly abandoned his previously cautious strategy. However, given the potential challenges he was facing from the nobility of Scotland it may equally have been the case that Wallace felt compelled to face the English in open battle sooner or later and prove that his success at Stirling Bridge - which was after all arguably at least as much Murray's as it was Wallace's - was not just a lucky accident. 

Whatever the case, the battle that followed was an utter catastrophe for the guardian. Abandoned by the cavalry, who may have lost their nerve as they had at Irvine or - as claimed by subsequent Scottish chroniclers - betrayed Wallace, Wallace's schiltrons - tightly-packed bodies of infantry armed with long spearmen - repelled the English cavalry but fell prey to English archery, which broke up their formations and left them vulnerable to a renewed assault by the cavalry. Wallace escaped the battle with his life, but his position as guardian had been irrevocably damaged. It is not entirely clear precisely when or where he resigned the guardianship, but by the end of 1298 Robert Bruce, earl of Carrick (the future king), and John Comyn, lord of Badenoch, were jointly exercising the office of guardian.

Wallace's time as guardian may have been decisively ended, but he remained an active opponent of the English in Scotland. The resistance he offered to the English in this period was not always in keeping with the wishes of the guardians. For instance, in August 1299 an altercation took place at a council at Peebles at which Wallace's plan to travel to France was condemned by Sir David Graham as being 'without the leave or approval of the Guardians'. Wallace's plans were defended by his brother Malcolm, who argued that they were at least 'for the good of the kingdom'

Wallace did indeed leave for France in 1299, apparently on a diplomatic mission to seek the support of King Philip IV against Edward I. Wallace's reception in France was initially hostile, since at the time Philip was himself seeking peaceful relations with Edward I, and Wallace was briefly incarcerated by the French king. However, in November 1300 Philip was writing to his envoys to the pope asking them to promote Wallace's case at the papal court. It is possible that Wallace himself visited to Rome assist in making the Scottish case to the pope in person, and the fact that when he was eventually he reportedly had on his person a safe-conduct from King Hakon V of Norway may suggest he also travelled to Norway on diplomatic business (although he may simply have planned to do so at some point). By 1303 - possibly earlier - he was back in Scotland and again involved in armed resistance to the English

By this point the tide in the war was slowly turning against the Scots. The French were once again pursuing a peaceful policy towards the English following their own military reversal at Courtrai in 1302. Scottish nobles were gradually making their peace with the English, and the surrender of Stirling Castle marked the effective end to organised Scottish resistance on a large scale. In light of his increasing success, Edward I was generally willing to be fairly accommodating towards those Scots who were willing to submit to him, but this was not so with Wallace. Indeed, in the general amnesty offered to the Scots by the English, Wallace might at best 'render himself up to the will and mercy of our sovereign lord the king, if it shall seem good to him' - hardly an encouraging prospect. When Wallace's long-standing cohort Simon Fraser submitted to Edward in July 1304, he was welcomed into the king's peace only on the understanding that he would assist in the ever-intensifying hunt for the fugitive Wallace. Nevertheless, Wallace remained at large until 3rd August 1305, when he was seized near Glasgow by men in the service of Sir John Menteith, keeper of Dumbarton Castle on behalf of King Edward. Menteith - identified as Wallace's 'gossop' ('godfather') by Harry.

Having finally captured Wallace, Edward I refused even to see him. Instead, Wallace was taken to London for what for want of a better word might be called a trial.

Sir Peter Malory, one of the king's justices, presided over the proceedings, which were little more than a formality. The charges were considerable. Wallace had, according his accusers, been a traitor to King Edward, perpetrated armed resistance against him and slain the king's officers (William Heselrig was mentioned by name), assumed the authority of 'a superior' of Scotland, submitted 'to the fealty and lordship of the lord king of France and [gave] him help to the destruction of the kingdom of England', made war on the northern counties of England, 'feloniously and seditiously assaulted, burned and devastated religious men and nuns...[and] inflicted [upon] all, old and young, wives and widows, children and babes the worst death which he could devise', and 'harmoniously and eagerly...refused to submit himself to the lord king's peace' even after being defeated at Falkirk. According to the Annals of London, he 'answered that he had never been a traitor to the king of England, but granted the other crimes charged against him'.

In the eyes of the English as an outlaw, Wallace had no recourse to a defence. Instead, he was summarily sentenced to be executed in the manner reserved for traitors. Wallace was thus 'dispolyeid of his weid' as Hary puts it and dragged naked on a hurdle through the streets of London. At Smithfield he was hanged by the neck 'for the robberies, homicides and felonies which he carried out in the kingdom of England and the land of Scotland'

Before he could suffocate he was taken down and emasculated and disembowelled 'for the dreadful wickedness which he did to the church'. His 'heart, liver and lungs and all the bowels...from which such perverse thoughts proceeded' were then burned. Presumably now dead, Wallace was beheaded - the punishment for outlawry - and his body was divided into four parts. His head was to be displayed on London Bridge (where it remained until at least September the following year, when it was joined by that of his former comrade Simon Fraser). The remaining quarters were to be displayed on gibbets at Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Berwick-upon-Tweed, Stirling and Perth, 'to put dread in and to warn all by-passers and observers'.

The savagery with which Wallace was dispatched contrasts sharply with Edward I's attitude toward the Scots in general, but let’s not forget it was the usual punishment for any person deemed to be a traitor.

However it appeared that Longshanks earlier experiences with the Scots had convinced the ageing English king that a more conciliatory approach to establishing a lasting English administration in the kingdom. Edward's new plan for the settlement of Scotland envisaged a ruling council composed primarily of Scots - including the likes of Bruce and Comyn - which would advise an English lieutenant who would retain overall authority. Scots law and custom was to be respected, at least in the short term, and it may have seemed to many at the time that the objections that had fuelled Wallace's original rebellion in 1297 had been addressed. 

As we know, the matter would be rendered moot less than six months after Wallace's death when Robert Bruce killed Comyn, forcing him to make public his ambition to become King of Scots. In many senses Bruce's struggle was quite unlike Wallace's, being primarily motivated by his own ambitions and perception of his rights. That being said, if Wallace had not maintained the momentum behind Scottish resistance to the English, particularly in the crucial year of 1297, then Bruce may never have had his opportunity to make his successful bid for power.

Pics are statues of Sir William Wallace around Scotland in order, Bemersyde near Dryburgh, Aberdeen, opposite His Majesty's Theatre,  Edinburgh Castle, Newmarket Street Ayr, St Nicholas Church, Lanark, Stirling Town Centre, The National Wallace Monument Abbey Craig, Stirling, showing it before and after it’s recent restoration,  Scottish National Portrait Gallery, Edinburgh and his memorial at Smithfield, London. There are others around the world that remember the Scots Patriot who so bravely stood up to fight for his country.

[trinuviel]

A hero in her own mind... On Daenerys Targaryen (part 3)

This is the third installment in my analysis of the character development of Daenerys Targaryen on Game of Thrones. (Part 1, Part 2)

Daenerys’ capabilities as a ruler are really being put to the test in season 5 when she faces organized, guerilla resistance in the form of The Sons of the Harpy. Her Unsullied soldiers are lured into ambushes or murdered with the help from some people among the citizens of Meereen. When one of the Sons of the Harpy is arrested, the thorny issue of justice reares its head once again. What is Daenerys to do with this rebel? We see her take council from different people but she only decides to give the rebel as fair trial after Ser Barristan Selmy tells her the truth about her father, the Mad King Aerys (season 5, episode 2):

Barristan

The Mad King gave his enemies the justice he thought they deserved and every time it made him feel powerful and right... Until the very end.

[Ominous music playing in the background]

This scene serves as a warning to Dany - and perhaps also as foreshadowing. 

One of the problems with Daenerys is her absolutionist approach to governing. There is no law but her will - and people can “live in her new world or die in their old one”, However, there can be no true justice under such conditions (no coherent system of law) because everything hinges on the will and/or whims of an absolute ruler. This is exactly what Barristan is warning her about. Initially, Daenerys take this warning to heart, but she forgets it the moment she feels blindsided or under pressure. So when the former slave Mossador kills the man awaiting trial, Dany promptly has him publically executed - without a trial!

There are a lot of things going on in this rather lengthy scene - but I want to draw specific attention the pacing. The focus of the scene, the beheading of Mossador, is torturously drawn out, which is an effective way to build tension. The former slaves plead for mercy, ever more loudly. Then the sword descends, killing Mossador. The camera cuts to a pair of upraised arms, which is accompanied with by a single voice shouting “Mhysa” - and then silence descends on the place of execution. A wideshot follows as well as a brief moment of silence, which is then broken by a strange hissing sound. All the former slaves are now hissing at Dany, they sound like snakes - and the effect is chilling and scary on a very visceral level. Then all hell breaks lose, violence erupts and Dany has to be escorted away beneath the shields of the Unsullied so that she can be protected from the people that she freed.

The visual staging of the scene is also very important because camera angle, costumes, etc., all function as non-verbal elements of story-telling. The visual staging of this scene emphasizes the distance between Daenerys and her subjects. There are several shots of her taken from a frog’s perspective (i.e. she is photographed from below) where she towers over her subjects, a remote figure of authority. That sense of remoteness is also articulated by her costume. Her white dress serves as a visual focal point - all eyes are drawn to Daenerys because the whiteness of her dress stands in sharp visual contrast to the yellows, browns and blues of all the other people in the scene.

Daenerys wears a lot of white in season 5. According to the costume designer Michelle Clapton, Dany’s white dresses signifies a:  

 "...rather untouchable [quality] to her. The idea behind the white and pale grey is the sense of removal, a removal from reality." (x)

"[The white] signifies her mental removal from some of the scenes that she has to be in — like in the fight pit. She doesn’t actually want to be there, so we wanted to show visually that she was removed. It was chaotic and bloody and colorful, and there was supposed to be this purity in the middle. She was visually removing herself from the things that she disagreed with." (x)

There’s a lot of subtle symbolism embedded in Clapton’s work for GoT - and I find the symbolic meaning of the “whiteness” of Dany’s costumes very interesting. On the one hand, white is traditionally associated with purity and innocence. But I don’t think anyone can claim that Dany is either innocent or pure. No ruler can be - and she already bloodied her hands in season 3 when she sacked Astapor. 

Clapton says that the white costumes also signifies an untouchable quality to Dany, which is a notion that I personally find very interesting. In what sense is Dany untoucable? Obviously, she is very powerful, protected as she is by an army. She also resides in the top of a huge pyramid, safely insulated from the chaos of the city - there’s certainly a connection between remoteness and untouchability. The pristine whiteness of her clothes stands in a stark contrast to the bloody chaos that erupts in the dusty streets of Meereen yet she is too powerful, too secure to be touched by it. 

Season 5 is a time of testing for Daenerys - and she is severely tested when she loses the advisors that have lent a steadying influence on her decisions. She banished Jorah Mormont at the end of season 4 and she loses Barristan Selmy in episode 4 where he is killed in an ambush by The Sons of the Harpy. Selmy’s death marks the moment where things start to spiral out of control for Dany, mainly because she doesn’t have enough self-discipline as a ruler to act cautiously and temper her decisions. Dany is a character who is strongly motivated by her emotions. That is not a bad thing in and of itself - but as a ruler, she doesn’t have the luxury to make decisions based solely on how she feels - add her tendency towards violent solutions and we have an explosive situation at hand. 

Without Barristan and Jorah there are no others who are able to temper Dany’s impulse towards extreme violence. Thus in episode 5 the audience is presented with a rather chilling scene where I find her behaviour truly terrifying. It was this scene that first made me question Dany’s fitness as a ruler and her status as a possible hero within the larger narrative of the show:

This is a Daenerys acting without the restraint of good advice - and she is absolutely terrifying! Gathering up a group of people that she suspects of treason, burning one of them alive and then feeding him to her dragons - that is simply NOT the act of a just and benevolent ruler! This kind of randomized violence as an tactic of intimidation is the act of an oppressor. She has no evidence that any of these men are guilty, one of them (Hizdarh zo Loraq) has actually worked with her - but she doesn’t really care about evidence:

Daenerys 

Who is innocent? maybe all of you are, maybe none of you are. Maybe, I should let the dragons decide.

In fact, it almost looks like Daenerys is enjoying her grisly display of power. The way she hovers, like a predator smelling blood, about a trembling Hizdarh certainly indicates that. (However, it is hard to tell with Emilia Clarke’s acting - she hasn’t got much range when it comes to non-verbal cues).

Later in episode 5, Dany vists Hizdahr in his cell to apologize to him, admitting that she was wrong about some things. However, her apology is immediately rendered void when she informs him that they’ll marry as an act of conciliation on her part whilst completely ignoring his lack of consent:

Daenerys

...in order to forge a lasting bond with the Meereenese people, I will marry the leader of an ancient family - thankfully the suitor is already on his knees.

Her disdain is palpable, and the mis-en-scene underscores her power and his complete lack of it. There can be no genuine conciliation without respect - and Dany doesn’t even bother to pretend that she has an earnest wish for co-operation.

Seasons 4 and 5 really highlights Daenerys’ flaws as a ruler: She rules without any kind of jurisprudence and the justice she meets out is as changeable and unpredictable as the moods of her dragons. She has a tendency to react to opposition with extreme violence unless cooler and wiser heads can manage to temper her reactions. The very fact that she continually needs to be reined in by others is a problem in itself. If she cannot keep a cool head when faced with dissent and opposition, then she is not fit to rule anything.

Throughout season 4 and 5, we have seen Daenerys’ decisions being questioned within the narrative through some of her interactions with Barristan, Jorah and Hizdahr. Season 5 Daenerys’ right to Westeros is questioned within the narrative in a similar manner, which takes the form of a conversation between Tyrion Lannister and Jorah Mormont as they travel towards Meereen in episode 6:

Tyrion

Why Daenerys? Why is she worth all this?

[...]

Jorah

Have you ever heard baby dragons singing?

Tyrion

No.

Jorah

It is hard to be a cynic after that.

Tyrion

Doesn’t mean she’s going to be a great queen.

Jorah

No, it doesn’t.

[...]

Tyrion

So a woman who has not spent a single day of her adult life in Westeros becomes the ruler of Westeros, is that justice?

Jorah

She’s the rightful heir.

Tyrion

Why? Because her father who burned men for amusement was king?

[Here their dialogue is interrupted and Tyrion never gets an answer from Jorah]

This scene serves two purposes: 1) it shows the audience that Tyrion is sceptical about Daenerys as a ruler, she has to prove herself to him before he’ll support her; and 2) it invites the audience to take a closer and more critical look at Daenerys, her motivations and her actions. It challenges the audience to think about why she wants to rule Westeros instead of simply taking her sense of entitlement at face value.

To be continued...

[chroniclerwabba]

it’s 5AM and i’m pissed about warcraft (mostly lore) again

I have a personal chip on my shoulder against Overwatch for reasons that might not be wholly valid. Project Titan (original OW) was started, and Blizz started to shift people around. Jeff Kaplan switched from working on WoW to Titan, and the game eventually got cancelled in 2014. Cataclysm’s released heralded a downturn for the quality of the game, not just in terms of lore.  The xpacs had a few good things in them (MoP is one of my favorites, the pandaren have great lore), but there was a lot of shit in there too. WoD was barebones as shit in terms of content with a completely nonsense storyline that took a huge shit on the lore. Titan was cancelled and recycled into Overwatch, a move that divided developers and even caused Metzen to quit.  I don’t blame or hold anger at Metzen for quitting (the guy had a fucking baby on the way, he needed to be a dad), but when he announced he was retiring, that’s when Warcraft really lost its magic to me and when I fell out of love with it.

So I blame Overwatch for what happened to Warcraft, which isn’t necessarly fair. Overwatch is fun and well made (in terms of art style that is, everything else is debatable). Maybe it makes more sense to blame the writers for losing their touch. But I still hold that slight disdain for Overwatch, even if it’s unfair. But enough about that; let’s talk about shitty lore.

Cataclysm is where the game just became bogged down with bad lore decisions, consisting of forced conflict and characters acting against their established selves to make said forced conflict happen.

Garrosh being made warchief was the first in a long laundry list of bad decisions. There was no reason Thrall would’ve logically made him leader even when being Grom’s son. It was evident he was not suited for this position and someone like Vol’jin or Saurfang should’ve taken the reins. He would’ve either kept him as a high ranking general like Nazgrim or waited until he matured a bit more and mellowed out to give him the mantle. It’s such a bullshit promotion that exists only to force conflict and have lore why PvP is still a thing (because it’s not like we can just have pvp be noncanon like bungie did with classic halo jesus fuck blizz you’re not 343 you don’t need to give pvp lore validity of fucking course the racial leaders aren’t really dead despite me killing them smh)

Garrosh is a bumbling inconsistent mess. In the books, Garrosh is smarter, but in the games, he’s a goddamn idiot and a brat with no sense of responsibility who blames Thrall during their fight in Nagrand (despite the fact that thrall literally left eitrigg, vol’jin, saurfang, and cairne behind to help him deal with shit and he tells them all to fuck off. also blaming thrall for him having to pick up the pieces is bullshit when he almost broke the horde because he literally kept trying to push the other races down into subservience, to a point where he tried to assassinate vol’jin). So Garrosh had no accountability as a leader. His whole plan to establish orcish supremacy and “make the horde great again” shows he has no fucking clue about orcish history despite his dad being IN THE SHIT. Orcish supremacy was all a lie concocted by Ner’zhul to fearmonger the draenei as evil invaders. Before the Horde, all the clans did was just live separately and fight the ogre empire who just wanted to enslave them. The Horde only exists because Kil’jaedan manipulated them into becoming one to wipe out the draenei. Garrosh doesn’t even know his own people’s fucking lore. Oh, and an extra special fuck you from when he said Thrall is no longer an orc. Nobody in the entire Warcraft lore has any right to tell Thrall he isn’t an orc. Thrall was a literal child soldier raised by Blackmoore to fight like an animal in his colosseum (his fucking name literally means SLAVE). The only human friend he had during his childhood was raped and beheaded and even lets Blackmoore’ men go free after he kills him in honorable combat.  Thrall has the most validity out of anyone in the Horde to be against the Alliance, but he just wants to give his people a home after the Legion stole it all and turned them into murderers. So anyway Garrosh can go fuck himself (except none of what I said actually matters because warlords of draenor established that all orcs are evil murderers even without demon blood so everything warcraft 3 was about means nothing i guess fuck you blizzard). Also, miss me with that bullshit about honor™ when you use a bomb to vaporize your enemies and not fight them by yourself on the fields of battle like your dad would’ve.

The Alliance hasn’t been written as morally grey or written to have flaws since Warcraft 3. Aside from Arthas’ and Jaina’s storylines, the rest of the Alliance is a bunch of assholes. Grom is forced to drink from the demon pool because the night elves started murdering them after they went to Ashenvale to cut down trees so they can build settlements to protect the orcs and their new tauren allies. The same allies the night elves just up and abandoned to be fucking murdered by the centaur almost to extinction despite how Cenarius himself blessed Huln Highmountain for his bravery for the tauren helping fight the legion alongside the kaldorei ten thousand years ago. So big fucking lore oversight, right? Also, since the kaldorei can just grow trees everywhere, why is there a logging crisis with the Horde? They can literally replace the trees right there. In fact, they could literally have solved the Horde’s famine crisis, but they don’t because they’re a bunch of stingy fucks who never get their shit called out. When people complain about Alliance favoritism, this is what they mean. The Horde always has to be the villain in some way, and the Alliance are always the good™ guys who never do anything wrong ever™. The closest we’ve gotten to the Alliance being somewhat morally grey was Camp Taurajo (which is swept under the rug with the biggest bullshit handwave by baine saying ehh it’s okay because that’s a realistic reaction). Jaina just straight up lets her men burn down and kill a bunch of native farmers whose race has lived here for years and never has to acknowledge this directly.

Jaina is almost as mishandled as Garrosh was. In the early days of MoP, they screwed up her being the anti-Horde character but could’ve salvaged it. Now they’ve just made her near irredeemable trash. So after Garrosh blows up Theramore and kills all her men, she’s pissed and out for blood and justifiably so. You want her to kill that motherfucker, but Blizzard doesn’t know about this thing called “moderation” or “reasonable chracter development” so they just decide to crank her up to 22 and have her be a stone cold murderer. She’s just gonna drown Orgrimmar and kill all sorts of innocent civilians inside, including an entire fucking orphanage of children she knows good and well exists since she’s visited the city many times before. Completely missed her the first time (because someone who watched her ex-fiance burn down an entire city including the children would be okay with killing children i guess). Thrall shows up and tries to tell her “hey, child murder is fucked up” and she doesn’t bother listening (apparently thrall isn’t allowed to be upset by children being victims of war despite having been a child slave himself but it’s somehow his fault because he made garrosh warchief even though there was no way he could’ve known this would’ve happen but whatever conflict i guess). So Kalecgos then shows up (who apparently is just her token love interest now and will never show up in the game to do anything useful so all that development he had in cataclysm is now moot. like fucking aggra at least helped thrall at the echo isles kalecgos didn’t do shit) and tells her “hey, child murder is bad” and it finally clicks in her head (so it took three times for her to figure out that she shouldn’t let small children die). Then we flash forward to Legion where Blizz has just decided they just don’t give a shit. Jaina shows up to Stormwind Keep and is pissed that the Horde abandoned the Alliance at the Broken Shore. So a grown ass woman in her 30s proceeds to be condescending and talk shit to a seventeen year old boy who just LOST HIS DAD about not wanting to fight two wars at once and risk crippling the Alliance (because apparently kul yiras no longer exists so she just can’t fund her own damn war i guess. also jaina apparently possesses a teleportation spell established since wotlk to exist that would’ve allowed her to save varian wrynn before he died so thanks a lot for the pointless death that could’ve been avoided for lore reasons, blizz. also we’re just supposed to forgive her racist piece of shit dad for wanting to commit ethnic cleansing and kill little orcish children because jaina needs to angst). Then she gets written out of the plot so Anduin never gets to call her out on the bullshit she tried to pull and so Blizz can shelve her for another forced war conflict. So Jaina has literally developed backwards to the beginning of Warcraft 3. Thanks, Blizz.

Sylvanas has angsted since WC3 that undeath is a curse and nobody should be subjected to it, only for Blizzard to keep turning her into Lich King 2.0 when we get Warlords of Northrend™ eventually (undeath is bad and i angst about it 24/7 so let me use all these chemicals to raise these people into zombies and plague the land but it’s okay because i think slavery is bad at least. also she’s afraid of going to hell to be tortured forever when it’s like “hey you dumb bitch maybe you wouldn’t go to hell if you didn’t keep raising people into zombies after establishing it’s a LIVING HELL TO BE A ZOMBIE”). So Sylvanas has also developed backwards. Thanks again, Blizz.

I’ve written this twice before, but Illidan is the biggest load of bullshit ever. In Warcraft 3, he was a great antihero. Kind of a dick, but you admired that he was out for himself. Now he’s the greatest™ hero™ ever™ that did nothing wrong™. He’s like a worse Anakin Skywalker.

All of WoD

anyway i’m going the fuck to sleep and then wake up in 5 hours to write wow fanfic to fill the hole that blizz’s nonsense created

[magterrific]

Grimm AU

~2k, t, canon fusion

The one where Jim is a Grimm (but doesn’t know it) and Bones is the Koschie he’s rooming with.

Leonard takes one look at his Academy roommate and sighs. "Is this going to be an issue?"

The guy- Jim- just frowns. "Is what going to be an issue."

"This." Leonard gestures between them, indicating the fraught relationship between Grimms and Wesen. Jim just frowns harder, and Leonard sighs. "You're a Grimm. I'm a Koschie. I want to be sure you're not going to cut my head off."

Jim makes a face. "Look, man. I don't know what kind of prank this is supposed to be, but it isn’t funny, okay? It’s just weird."

Leonard frowns, considers the evidence before him. Jim really doesn't seem to know what Leonard's talking about. But that's impossible. There's no way Leonard is mistaking what he sees in Jim's eyes.

Unless... Unless Jim is a Grimm who doesn't know he's a Grimm.

"God damn," Leonard breathes. God damn.

 xx

 "How does he not know what he is?" Leonard asks Pike the next day. It took a lot of throwing his weight around, but he managed to get an appointment with captain and current head recruiter. "More to the point, what made you think an uninitiated Grimm isn't a safety hazard?"

Pike rubs his temples. For a human, he's usually understanding of Wesen issues, but he got this one wrong. Way wrong.

"His father was George Kirk," Pike says slowly, and Leonard feels his jaw drop.

"No way," he says, shaking his head. "No goddamn way. How could he not know about Wesen if he's the son of George Kirk?"

"It was his mother's wish, apparently."

"Yeah, well, his mother's an idiot." Leonard shakes his head. He doesn't want to imagine what growing up as a Grimm without knowing what a Grimm even is would be like. "I'm telling him."

"He won't thank you,” Pike warns.

Leonard shrugs. "Good thing I don't care."

 xx

 Leonard waits for the weekend, then corners Jim in their suite after lunch. He doesn't say anything, doesn't give Jim any warning, just turns around so they're facing each other and lets out his woge.

Jim's eyes go wide, and he swallows hard. He blinks, even gives his head a shake, but Leonard doesn't let his woge end.

Raising a hand, he points to his face. "Like I said- Koschie. You see me, don't you?"

"I don't-"

"Jim." Leonard lets the woge fall away. "I'm not the first Wesen you've met."

"That- I don't know what you're talking about."

Leonard sighs. "You know those stories about things that go bump in the night?" Jim nods. "Well, Wesen are what they're based on, thanks to people like you."

Jim tenses up. "Look, man. I'm not spreading stories about anybody, okay?"

"Your ancestors, Jim," Leonard says, willing Jim to listen. "You're a Grimm. You hunt people like me."

 xx

 Finding out that he isn't hallucinating makes Jim relax immeasurably. Where before he was a toxic mess of tension of resolute isolation, after he finds out he’s a killing machine- but a sane one- he becomes a different man entirely. He's open and friendly and walks with his chin up high. Which is good. Leonard is happy for him.

What isn't so good is the fact that this newfound confidence has also manifested in Jim taking an interest in Leonard. A romantic interest.

It's a goddamn crush, and Leonard is about one divorce too old to be the subject of crushes.

"Shoo," he says when Jim appears in the clinic, a box in his hands.

Jim just gives him an earnest look and opens the top, revealing a series of cardboard boxes. Leonard takes an experimental sniff.

"Tandoori?"

Jim nods quickly, and Leonard is forced to sigh and give into his growling stomach- he had to skip breakfast to get to the clinic on time. Which Jim knew before he went and got take out.

"This isn't a date," Leonard says lowly.

Again, Jim nods. He's smiling brightly as he takes his seat next to Leonard at the table in the break room, though, but Leonard can't find it in himself to make him stop.

 xx

 They're lying on their backs on the floor between their beds, comfortably buzzed, when Jim finally asks.

"Being a Grimm is hereditary, right?"

"Yep."

"And my dad was a big deal?"

"Yep."

"So he would have killed you, huh?"

Leonard thinks about that for a while, really thinks about it. The answer is complicated, but most answers are. The real issue is figuring out how to talk about this without setting off Jim’s issues. "Depends," he says after a while. "At first? Yeah. He would’ve killed me on sight. But later..."

"Later?" Jim prompts when Leonard fails to finish.

Leonard shrugs. "You don't know much about him as a Grimm, do you?"

"I don't know much about him period."

And damn if that doesn't make Leonard's heart hurt. He's done his best to make sure Jo knows all about him. His flaws and his triumphs, they all belong to her, too. His legacy is her inheritance.

Lifting a hand, Leonard lazily drops it over Jim's shoulder and gives it a squeeze. Jim allows the touch, even leans into it.

"Wesen fear Grimms," Leonard continues, voice soft, "but you know that already."

"Because we hunt you," Jim says.

"Because you hunt us," Leonard agrees. "But even among Grimms, the Kirk name is infamous. Your family decimated us." And they did so ruthlessly, beheading and impaling and torching everything in their path. There was a time when just a whisper of them could send Wesen scattering to the wind. The Kirk name was used as a threat even as recently as Leonard's youth- be good, or you'll be thrown to the Kirks. But Jim doesn't need the burden of that knowledge. "Your father was set to carry on that legacy," he continues. "But for some reason, toward what became the end of his life, he stopped. He became an advocate of peace, even going so far as to befriend local Wesen and give them his protection- provided they followed the law."

"Why'd he do that?"

Leonard shrugs. "Couldn't tell you. He never told us why he changed his mind. But if I had to guess, I'd say it was you."

"How the hell could I have changed his mind? I wasn't even born."

"Exactly. Animosity isn't a one-way street, Jim. There are plenty of dangerous Wesen. Your father had enemies. It could be he didn't want you to inherit them."

"But Sam..."

"It's just a theory," Leonard says with a shrug. "It could just as easily be he wanted to retire. I don't know what goes through your damn Grimm heads."

Here, he gives Jim's shoulder a shake.

Jim snorts. "As if Koschie are any better?"

"My kind are far simpler than yours."

"Your kind get off on healing people."

This time it's Leonard who shrugs. "At least we heal first. I can't help what my biology wants afterwards."

Jim hums and lets the conversation drop, but Leonard just knows it isn't gone from Jim's head.

 xx

 "Is Jo a Wesen, too?"

Leonard doesn't look up from his xenobiology textbook. "She is."

"Is she like you?"

"She is."

"And your wife- ex-wife?"

"Joss is also a Koschie."

Out of the corner of his eye, Leonard sees Jim nods to himself. A sense of impending dread pools in Leonard's belly, but he ignores it, forcing his mind instead onto Orion hormones.

 xx

 Two days later, Jim sits down next to Leonard and asks, with no preamble, "What about Wesen and Grimms?"

"What about them?" Leonard asks.

"Do they ever get together?"

"Get together as in date?" Jim nods, and Leonard has to fight the urge to snort. "No, Jim. They don't."

"Why not?"

"You do remember the part where Grimms hunt Wesen, right?"

"Yeah, but some of them must have been good."

Leonard shrugs. "If they were, they didn't make a production of it. Hell, before your father, I'd never heard of a Grimm even tolerating Wesen- at least not before the Verrat came to be."

"What's that?"

"Something you will be happier not knowing about," Leonard says, and for once, Jim picks up on his tone and doesn't push.

 xx

 "We should make history," Jim slurs.

Leonard braces himself. "Make history how?"

"With love," Jim says seriously.

"That's the most absurd thing you've ever said."

"But, Bones-!"

"No buts. You're a Grimm. I'm a Wesen. Even if we were otherwise compatible, which I'm not sure we are, it would be a colossally bad idea."

"But, Bones!"

"And there's the fact that you're shitfaced. Come on. Let's get you into bed."

Jim's eyes light up.

Leonard resists the urge to pick him up and drop his on his ass. "For sleep, you animal."

Jim deflates but obediently crawls under the covers. Leonard tucks him in with a roll of his eyes. Damn man can't even get drunk in their suite without making a scene.

"Hey, Bones?"

"Yeah, Jim?"

"I wouldn't kill you."

"Well that's real comforting."

"I mean it!" Jim says, struggling to sit up.

Leonard pushes on Jim's shoulder, forcing him to lie back. "I know you do," he says softly. "You're a good man, Jim. Even if you are a pain in the ass."

Jim smiles up at him, and Leonard's treacherous heart stutters in his chest.

 xx

 "I don't care about history," Jim says, marching into the bathroom. His eerie Grimm eyes make Leonard's heartbeat pick up as they always do, but it's the crinkles in Jim's forehead that convince Leonard that whatever this is, it's serious.

Even if he's leaning on the sink and dressed in nothing but a towel, razor in hand.

Jim doesn't hesitate, just takes another step into the room and shuts the door behind him. It's still hot from Leonard's shower, the steam slow to dissipate. It gives Jim an almost otherworldly look as he steps into Leonard's space.

"I don't care about how things were. I care about how they are now- how they could be. And I know we'd be good, Bones. We'd be so good."

"There's more to it than that," Leonard says.

"Give me one good reason why I shouldn't kiss you," Jim plows on.

"We're technically different species."

"I've slept with aliens. Try again."

Leonard sighs. "It might make it harder for me to have Jo. Officially, Joss can't say anything about you being a Grimm, but if a certain kind of judge got the case..."

Jim lowers his eyes, and Leonard knows he's won. The victory doesn't make him feel any better, though. He doesn't actually want to say no to Jim. He lost everything in the divorce, but here, at Starfleet, with Jim, he finally got something back.

He doesn't hesitate when he steps forward. He doesn't think about all the ways this could go horribly, terribly wrong. He just thinks about the stiff fabric of the collar of Jim's reds and the soft feeling of Jim's lips against his.

Jim doesn't take long to rally. He kisses back hard and desperate, as if even his ego hadn't predicted that Leonard would bend to him. His hands bury themselves in Leonard's hair, and even though it hurts, there's nowhere Leonard would rather be. There's no one he'd rather be with.

He knows deep in the bones Jim always calls him by that there's nowhere he won't go so long as Jim is there with him.