#he gets a character redemption arc as a treat

[spacebugarts]

Stupid fish boy get out of my head /pos

[sbd-laytall]

Personally, I think Jonathan's best moment in Smallville is when he beats up Lionel and almost chokes him out, but that's just me.

[nottodayupstarts]

Hawk core. cuz holding someone down and shaving of their hair should definitely be seen as a positive thing for a character.

Everyone clap for non consensual body modification everybody loves a character whose body has been altered against their will

[sparsilees]

it’s almost the end of 2024. can we drop this absolutely inane fanonical idea that harry james potter is “oblivious” or “unobservant” or “average”?

fuck your fanon harry. fuck that soggy tissue who doesn’t inspire confidence in others. fuck that lummox who cannot string a sentence together. fuck that hothead who’d lash out in anger and throw punches at every provocation. fuck that namby-pamby who can’t read clues or between the lines or come up with a plan of action. fuck that sheep who can’t function without hermione’s direction. fuck that neanderthal who’s a messy eater, messy writer, messy speaker, and has poor manners.

who the bloody hell is that? that’s not harry james potter. why are you twisting and malforming him into a bloody clown?

why are you undermining the main character of his own series? boy has an abysmal self-esteem, stays quiet and lowkey, bottles up his truest feelings and thoughts (that we as readers are privy to, but not the other characters!), and has a calm and composed mien so you think you too can dismiss his character easily and strip him down to a skeleton of his canon self and instead carve out huge character growth, redemption arcs, and love letters for everyone else?

you wish to evoke sympathy for draco by making lucius out to be an abusive father and crafting a pitiful childhood for draco when they have an affectionate parent-child relationship canonically, but downplay harry’s abuse? you realise that tom riddle, sirius black, james potter, and hermione granger are acknowledged to be the brightest of their generation, yet forget harry potter and tom riddle are two sides of the same coin, even sharing a similar appearance, and reduce harry to a silly caricature? you make harry magically powerful but wrest his smarts away to highlight someone else’s big brain?

you make him out to be a short dork with a shorter fuse and no idea what’s going on around him when harry and tom are both described as woe-ridden orphans—with all that entails from constant hunger to cold sleepless nights to hypervigilance to the forced, quick maturity—but treat tom true to canon as tall, cunning, and clever, then do an about-face to conveniently slap the malnourished, oblivious, and slacker labels on harry to make him as lesser than?

when he picked up the impervious spell simply from having seen hermione perform it once, when his closest friends have difficulty gleaning his thoughts, when his anger is cold and sharp like dumbledore (ootp was a study in ptsd, next!), when he’s just as tall as his father, was just as ill-treated as a house elf, and rightfully brilliant as the son of lily and james potter—the two powerful and talented individuals who once had voldemort trying to recruit them to join his cause?

the sheer disrespect on his name. the sheer mockery of his character. the absolutely mind-boggling erasure of his most defining traits.

who do you think sussed out most of the big clues, and stowed away all the little, random bits of information in his memory bank, to ultimately piece the puzzle together at the final showdown every end of the school year? who realised as a mere firstie that quirrel was the man hagrid blabbed to about fluffy and the dragon egg? who noted that ginny was withdrawn and unlike herself? who had an inkling fleur had taken a fancy to bill? who picked up on what was brewing between ron and hermione before their own selves? who noticed that hermione cast a confundus on cormac mclaggen during the match? who caught on instantly to the change in tense used for the diadem’s existence and confidently tracked it down? who cottoned on to luna’s longtime disappearance from her cold, untouched bed and the layer of dust? who did voldemort consider his equal? who actually has an uncanny sense of intuition? who calls the shots when the trio gets into a pickle? who?

mcgonagall? flitwick? draco? hermione? blaise zabini? no!

excuse harry for that one time he did not look deeply into the mental workings of a grieving girl because he’s not equipped to deal with them, and has in the first place never been taught to process his own emotions properly because he didn’t grow up in a healthy environment, prohibited from expressing his feelings, let alone vulnerability, and voicing his thoughts!

let’s bury this annoyingly stupid narrative for good. go read the books and refresh your perspective. stop doing him dirty. you’ve already butchered sirius black’s character into a pathetic sisspot. and now you want to assassinate harry’s too.

[thatmooncake]

Liking Nexus and wanting to imagine him getting a redemption arc isn’t cringe, some of you guys are just mean

People go to great lengths to defend their faves, seemingly afraid they’ll get the same treatment Nexus did both by the fans and the series and become the demonised unfavourite - the scapegoat who can do no right. At the same time many insist Nexus and his fans somehow uniquely “deserve” this treatment (Nexus can’t, he’s made up - his fans don’t, some people are just mean) and that these things befell Nexus specifically for an actual reason.

They did.

The reason was the writers wanted something new for the character.

Not him not trying hard enough to grieve better or be a better victim of Ruin’s actions. Not him “liking Solar more than Sun”. Not New Moon being the “worse” choice out of him and Moon (meta reason given is Moon literally came back because they needed a Moon - of course Moon was the better choice out of him and Nexus who was an active threat at the time, the reverse would’ve been true if it’d been New Moon vs Moon with the killcode actively causing damage). Not him being more villainous than Ruin or Eclipse (I am not going to be debating whether genocide or murder is morally better or worse than verbally, psychologically and physically harming a small handful of people, sorry). Not something that was subtly established throughout his entire time as New Moon. Not something that was planned from the start. Just a change in direction. That holds literally no moral weight - that’s not something to hate each other over. The writers are allowed to do that - it also needs to be understood as being a writing decision that, although it was retroactively woven into the narrative to some degree, was made on a whim.

It could’ve more or less been any character this happened to. It still could happen to basically any of them. They’re made up, they don’t make their own choices, they don’t get to fight against what the writers want, they don’t get to make appeals on narrative decisions. You’re not watching a documentary of a fictional world where in-story choices aren’t made for a meta narrative reason - sometimes writing decisions are made on the fly due to the nature of the medium. And when the characters’ choices don’t fit within the established narrative aside from to be a change for the sake of change (literally the meta reason given for Nexus going evil) and the in-story reason that has been repeatedly established for the entire villain arc is literally psychosis plus ingesting a substance that made the character in question quite literally lose his mind as demonstrated and explained by multiple other characters - both mitigating factors that didn’t need to be included if they weren’t supposed to be taken into account when considering how this character got to where he got - when his villain arc alone required a mastermind interloper character to step in and manipulate his every step into villainy, his decisions can’t be reasonably treated as 100% informed or as part of his established in-story disordered “personality”, because we already know they happened because they needed to happen for the story to progress the way the writers wanted it to, and yet still effort was put into heavily mitigating his ability to make good choices, which shouldn’t just be written off or ignored because you want to bash the character or make his fans feel bad for liking him.

More food for thought: Nexus isn’t blameless or a good guy. He’s done bad things. Despite Dark Sun’s involvement, despite the nsp, despite the grief, despite the psychosis. You don’t have to like him, pretend to find him good or interesting, or give him a pass. You can hate his guts. But you know who else was unequivocally considered a bad guy who didn’t deserve a pass at the time he died (twice, maybe three times in fact)? Eclipse. You know who accomplished more damaging acts of villainy and had just as bad or worse intentions than Nexus at the time of his death(s)? Eclipse.

And the difference between the two - the thing that sees Nexus written off as an irredeemable “psychopath” (respectfully, both this and “narcissist” are misappropriated terms for stigmatised disorders so it’s best not to use them in this circumstance btw) while Eclipse is now praised for taking all these steps in the right direction - is that the writers chose to give Eclipse a redemption arc and they didn’t choose to go down that route with Nexus. Nexus was not more uniquely “deserving” of being the narrative unfavourite or the scapegoat. He just wasn’t chosen to get better - he wasn’t allowed to do better. That could have been Eclipse. That could have been Ruin. In this case it was Nexus. Like it or not, that’s just simply how it happened.

I’m allowed to care about that and imagine more possibilities. You’re allowed to not care about that and dislike him. You don’t get a pass for bullying people over it.

There is literally no good reason to demonise Nexus or his fans more than any other character or keep telling them what he is or isn’t “capable of” or “correct” them and laugh at them for imagining alternative outcomes they might like better. The canonical answer is: he’s not capable of anything anymore, he’s not in the story. The non-canonical answer is: let people use their own imaginations, especially when the writers have decided they don’t want to or have chosen not to use this character anymore. That’s not a diss on them. It is what it is.

Have you seen the DCA fandom? The DCA isn’t canonically a mermaid or a spy or a god or anyone’s love interest. The DCA doesn’t get adopted in canon. No one let that stop them from having fun, and honestly power to them for their creativity and acceptance even when they disagree. Imagination isn’t cringe - it’s a good thing. It’s great that people enjoy this character that much actually. We all have stuff we like and dislike and don’t care about and that’s a-okay. There’s a difference between that and constantly derailing people’s fun to say rude insulting things about the thing they like while they’re trying to talk about it. You’re not hurting Nexus - Nexus isn’t real, he isn’t capable of being hurt. You’re hurting real people for the crime of liking a made up character in a way you don’t like or agree with. Say what you like about things being cringe - that’s worse than cringe. I don’t care how badly you want to find someone or a group of people you can say it’s acceptable to bully for some reason. You’re not being cute and sassy, you’re just being mean. People are allowed to harmlessly enjoy themselves (especially if their fave happened to draw the short end of the stick in canon) even if you don’t like it or find it annoying - please give other people that level of consideration at least.

(And no I won’t be derailing this to debate Nexus’ morality or whether you think that I’m somehow saying he didn’t make any of his own choices or didn’t do anything wrong (tl;dr I didn’t). Respectfully, this post is about meta narrative analysis and fandom meanness and how yes, basically any character could’ve been and could still be Nexus’d.)

[prettyinpwn]

Stan Pines: A Masterclass in Character Writing and Symbolism AKA Stan is Godly, Literally (GF Writing Analysis Pt. 5)

If you're interested in reading a similar writing analysis on Ford Pines, please visit this page.

I've wanted to write a post on Stan for a long time, because I'm going to make a bold claim: he is THE best written character in Gravity Falls. I literally have never been able to find a flaw with his writing, and the reason? Not only does he have the markers of quality I mentioned in my post about Ford's writing (a want, need, character arc, realistic flaws), but...

I would also argue he is THE main protagonist and hero of Gravity Falls if I had to pin it down to just one, and his character arc matches the external conflict, that being Bill Cipher and the theme of growing up vs. staying in childhood and ego vs. selflessness, in ways that are just - and I'm not exaggerating - poetic. And the best part is, he had a lot more time and attention in the spotlight in the show than Ford, so everything I mentioned in the other post that was good about Ford's writing, ramp that up x100 for Stan.

His character also touches on multiple other fantastic themes: breaking generational trauma, healing broken familial relationships that seem unfixable, redemption, the misunderstanding of the family "fuckup" (although Stan is not that in the least, but that's part of his character arc), positive masculinity, true brotherhood, self-love, self-identity, and probably a million others I'm missing and will find out even just as I write this.

As for the godly part, well... you'll just have to read to the end. And no, I'm not kidding or exaggerating, either.

Okay, okay, gushing aside, let's get to the analysis. I'm not sure this will be as neatly structured as Ford's was, but there are just so many damn good things about Stan's writing that it's hard to stick to just one point. Let us begin.

Stan's Backstory: I Am Not Ford and That's Bad + Protecting/Providing for Family > Everything Else

So as I discussed in my post about Ford linked above, much of Stan's childhood revolved around Ford. His entire existence as a child was summed up by one question: how do I compare to Ford? This is especially emphasized in how their father, Filbrick, treated them. One of the end credits ciphers in the show reads as follows:

"A STUBBORN TOUGH NEW JERSEY NATIVE, FILBRICK WASN’T TOO CREATIVE, HAVING TWINS WAS NOT HIS PLAN, SO HE JUST SHRUGGED AND NAMED BOTH STAN."

Haha, very funny. But OUCH. Imagine knowing that your whole name is your name, was because your father only expected one son and was too lazy to come up with anything else. So literally, Stan doesn't even have his own name - his own identity - technically. Stan also was apparently the second twin born, so came in "second" even from birth, and being Ford's (either identical or very similar fraternal) twin, well... it's hard for someone to untie their identity from their brother's with those factors surrounding them as a kid.

There are many other factors that illustrate my point (Ford got Filbrick's name as his middle name, the way Filbrick literally put Stan on the lawn for sale as a kid for failing a test, etc). All in all, Ford receives their father's love, Stan does not, although we could argue that this isn't that great for Ford, not really, as I did in my post on his writing. Because it's a love that comes with a, "I'd also like to use you." attached (just like Bill, gee).

All in all, it's very obvious from all these context clues that Ford was the beloved one, and Stan was the unexpected one, from birth to the end of Gravity Falls, where he uses that to his advantage - albeit in a different context - to defeat Bill Cipher.

Worse yet, Stan happened to have a twin that was extremely smart and talented in a way that was easily noticed. Ford is a Golden Child, as I described in his own writing analysis post, and siblings of the golden child like Stan? Well... the other sibling(s) are often the Scapegoat. As the source in the last sentence states, the Scapegoat is "often blamed for family mistakes, discarded, neglected, and has been gaslighted into believing it was their fault. The scapegoated child is usually assigned at a young age and often carries this role through to adulthood and never loses the unfortunate title.". This can highly affect the Scapegoat's self-esteem, even into adulthood.

This page also covers the Golden Child vs. Scapegoat dynamic. Pay attention to these quotes from this source:

"You are the one the parent will come after when things are going wrong."

"You are subjected to their emotional and verbal abuse the most."

"You may even feel like you need to fix your broken family."

Also, take into account these panels from the comic, Lost Legends, released after Gravity Falls ended:

Yikes. A child doesn't say these things unless a parent has taught them that everything they do is wrong and they are lesser than their sibling. This kid's noticed how Filbrick looks with pride at Ford, but not him. And here's the thing: the item Stan stole in this comic that made Filbrick mad? Stan did it to clean it to make his father proud. Sound familiar? In the events of Gravity Falls, Stan works on the portal for thirty years and gets Ford back, and he gets... yelled at for it. Stan always has good intentions. Although, Ford has a point in the above comic panel: Stan does take shortcuts that get him into trouble. He did almost get jailed by the US government and end the universe to save Ford.

But this is a consistent theme with Stan's character throughout the show. Even WE as the audience first see Stan the way his family did - a conniving scoundrel and money-grubbing criminal - but through the events of the show, just as Stan's family starts to realize it, even when Stan does things that seem bad, like stealing radioactive waste, working on a portal described as a potential cause of the end of the world, has a ton of different identities, etc... we find out Stan had good intentions all along.

Even Stan's greediness? That need for money? That also stemmed from the same good intentions, because how ELSE was he going to afford Ford's mortgage to keep the Shack in order to keep working on bringing him home? It was also likely something ingrained into him from when he was kicked out. Because Filbrick told him, basically, until you make us the money that Ford losing his chance at West Coast Tech cost us, GTFO. Literally. :'(

So Stan... really IS not what he seems. He seems like a fuckup, a criminal, a liar, and a greedy conman. But really... he's a family defender, protector, and supporter. Want to have your mind blown? Intentional or not, let's look at the very first scene we see Stan in in the series:

"Oh look, I'm a monster!"

"Just kidding, I'm not. I'm someone else under what looks like a monster."

Yes. Stan's whole character arc is foreshadowed in like... three seconds in the first episode. The very first time we see him. Not just his arc, but also his role as someone that seems deceptively evil but is actually good. And not just the arc that Ford and Dipper take from distrusting Stan to finally understanding his good intentions, but also the realization WE as viewers have about Stan as we follow the story. Additionally - which we'll get into later - it's symbolic of Stan's internal character arc he takes across the series of realizing he himself isn't the monster that his father planted in his mind as a child, but a good person worthy of love.

All of that... in a few seconds of animation. If that wasn't intentional, then DAMN did the writing gods smile on the Gravity Falls team the day they planned this scene. Back to the point about who Stan really is: the family "fuckup" (not really, but we'll get to that later), and a family defender and protector. This is the true core of Stan's character throughout the whole series. Not only was he Ford's defender as a child, protecting him from bullies, but you know those scenes the fandom universally agrees on were Stan at his most badass? Ahem...

"Everything I've worked for, everything I care about, it's all for this family!"

"Turn around and look at me, you one-eyed demon! You're a real wise-guy, but you made one fatal mistake: you messed with my family."

Yeah. Look at what Stan is doing in EVERY single one of these scenes: protecting his family. And as bad as Filbrick was, just like I explained in the post I made about Ford's writing... Filbrick also passed down some things to Stan that make him the hero he is. And it's also stuff that Stan passes down to Dipper:

Yeah, it kinda sucked for Dipper at the time. Was it a perfect way of teaching a child to be tough? Er, no, although another mark of a well-written character is that they can make mistakes and have flaws; Stan's not perfect. And the fandom has criticized the way Stan passed down this lesson to Dipper, because it can be considered very similar to the way Filbrick passed it down to Stan. But look what it did: when the world fights and threatens his family, just like Stan, Dipper fights back. With punches, too:

So... to summarize this first part: Stan was taught from childhood "I'm not Ford, and that's bad. I am a monster unworthy of love that always messes up.", and his role is a family protector, which started with how he protected Ford from bullies as a child. This is the core of his self-identity. So let's get into the writing techniques that make a well-written character that I discussed in Ford's writing analysis post...

Stan's Core Want vs. Need

I'll quote my explanation of want vs. need from my own post on Ford I made about a year ago:

"When I took writing classes in college (and over years of writing in general and drooling over writing advice podcasts and blogs), I found that the best method for me, personally, when it comes to crafting characters is to focus on two major things:

1. Their want.

2. Their need.

On the surface, these look like the same things, but in character writing, they can be vastly different. For example, say that you have a character that greatly desires fame and recognition. They want these things.

But what’s the real reason behind it? Is it because they had a parent that was famous and want to live up to their example? Is it because they want to be adored by people? Is it because they were told they’d never amount to anything by someone and want to prove them wrong?

This real reason behind it all is the core need. Yes, they want fame and recognition, but they need it because, say, they have low self-esteem and need copious amounts of outside validation to boost it.

Tied to this need is usually a backstory reason (sometimes called their wound). Say your hypothetical character was bullied a lot as a child. Or abused by a parent. Etc. Whatever the wound was, it caused a big, painful hole in their heart that they try to fill and fix with their want.

So they go on a journey. The want is often the external journey. The need is often the core journey / character arc. Our example character seeks fame and recognition on an external journey, but deep inside, they realize they need something else, which is to understand that their past trauma/wound doesn’t define them, and fame and recognition will not be the balm they expect it will be. Often, they realize they had what they needed all along. They grow past their flaws associated with their seeking this want through understanding and instead pursuing the need."

I'll summarize Stan's character writing using these concepts right here, like I did for Ford in his analysis post:

“I want to be Ford because I want to be loved like he is, and I want to protect those I care about and do the right thing. But what I need is to realize is that who I am - not Ford, but Stan - was good enough all along, proven by how I've always protected those I care about, and I never NEEDED to be Ford in the first place. This stems from a wound from my childhood where I was a scapegoat child treated like a fuckup who never did anything right and could never measure up to Ford, and was conditioned to think that being like Ford was a ticket to earn familial love. I had what I needed all along: myself, because I am good enough and worthy of love, despite what my father taught me."

Stan's Arc: I Am Not Ford... and That's Okay

AKA Stan's arc is basically: learning to love yourself and be yourself, even when you were conditioned to think you have no value. Don't believe me? Guess what Stan does for thirty years: pretends to be Ford. And he literally does it by pretending to have died. He "kills" Stanley Pines AKA himself in a staged car crash to become Stanford Pines.

And guess how he defeats Bill? By pretending to be Ford. His greatest weakness is actually his strength, and then he flips it: he reveals to Bill that he's not Ford, he's actually Stan. And THAT'S when the antagonist of Gravity Falls is truly defeated - an antagonist that represents stasis, lack of change, and with The Book of Bill's context, an antagonist that never freed himself from his own past - is when Stan learns to accept himself and admit who he really is and learns to let the past go. And it's telling that this is what he says when he does it:

"Heh. Guess I was good for something after all." AKA: "Yeah, fuck what Pa said about me."

There it is. The moment of Stan realizing his father was wrong, and he was wrong for thinking himself a fuckup all those years. And this is the expression he pulls at this moment of realization; at the peak of his character arc, all while burning in flames like a phoenix reborn. It sounds corny when I put it that way, but LITERALLY, all the fire symbolism feels like it wasn't foreshadowing Stan's death, but his rebirth as himself after pretending to be Ford all those years. He's not burning who he is, he's burning away who he thought - who he was told - he was. Funny that it takes place in the mind, huh?

This is the face of a man who is at peace and finally loves himself for the first time in his life. That ain't just his mind burning. That's him punching his demon that's haunted him and his brother their whole lives, protecting his family as always, and, symbolically, punching a demon that represents the show's overall antagonist of the shackles of staying stuck in the past, forgiveness, and the value of moving on. He literally punches the antagonist - staying stuck in the past - to pieces and THAT'S when he wins.

Also, can we talk about how Bill and Filbrick share color schemes, and Filbrick even has a brick-like pattern in his suit (also, I mean... come on, he's got 'brick' in his name)? I'll let you make your own conclusion about what that means for Stan's character arc:

It's also telling that Bill Cipher's backstory is that he burned his home dimension and loved ones - including his family - to ashes. The Axolotl - Gravity Falls' equivalent of basically God, from what I can tell - says himself about Bill in one of the books released outside of the show:

"Saw his own dimension burn. Misses home and can't return. Says he's happy. He's a liar. Blame the arson for the fire."

Bill misses home. He wants the past and to hold onto his family, just like Stan and Mabel do. Isn't it funny how whenever Bill shows up... time stops?

And look what Bill says in Weirdmageddon: "This party never stops! Time is dead and meaning has no meaning!"

Time stopped. He just wants fun. He's almost like a child that never grew up. And... look at what it was that Stan wrecked in A Tale of Two Stans as a teenager:

A perpetual motion machine. That thing that's not supposed to stop, just like time. Stan 'breaking' time by wanting to hold Ford in the past, with him, instead of leaving him to go to college while Stan was stuck in the past/Glass Shard Beach? That's what broke their brotherhood.

But what makes Stan a hero, and Bill a villain, is that he lets go of the past and his childhood. Bill never does. And he's defeated when Stan lets go of the past, something Bill never did. Why? Because he has family to make facing the future easier. He has familial and self love. Bill doesn't, because he killed his own. (Sorry, got off track again, but Stan's arc and story ties so deeply to the other characters' and the main themes that it's hard not to take some detours, because it illustrates just how well-written Stan is. Gravity Falls' story IS his story.).

Wanna know something cute? Wanna know how Stan realized he had worth during that scene after he defeats Bill? Why I'm betting the show runners showed Stan clutching to a picture of Dipper and Mabel as this happens? I'll give you one guess why Dipper and Mabel are so important to Stan, and why he clutches to their photo even as his mind is burning apart in the finale:

They're the first family members since Ford (whose love he'd lost) who loved Stan for who he was, not for who they thought he should have been. Mabel trusting Stan in Not What He Seems is basically the first damn time Stan's heard in thirty plus years from a family member that, "Hey, I trust you have good intentions and aren't just a lying fuckup. You're not a monster. You're not what you seem.".

Also, he's protecting his family. That always makes him happy, too, of course.

Ego Death and the "Stan is Godly" Part

Yep, we're taking this analysis post train all the way to "damn this is deep and PrettyinPwn is likely crazy for noticing it" station. The only reason I'm tacking this part on is that I saw a Q&A with Hirsch recently that sparked my attention. He was on his The Book of Bill tour, and someone asked if there was anyone more powerful than Bill in Gravity Falls lore. Of course, Hirsch said the Axolotl, but what he said about what Bill vs. the Axolotl stands for caught my eye:

The video in question. The question and answer starts around 21:22. The quote I want to point out is, though, is what we learn about these two beings:

Hirsch: "Bill's weaknesses in terms of his overconfidence, his ego, and his lack of ability to focus on one thing at a time are things that a being that has no ego, thinks on a long scale, and does have empathy is actually stronger than him because of those things."

So when we boil the conflict of Bill vs. the Axolotl down to simple terms - what makes evil vs. good in the Gravity Falls universe - is this: ego and selfishness vs. no ego and empathy.

Guess which characters wrestle with these themes? The correct answer is: ALL of them. But especially Stan and Ford. This is really what their conflict is about at the core. They both struggled with ego and selfishness, and that's when - in the story - they lose most. But they win when they choose selflessness and empathy. When they... drum roll, please... partake in ego death.

Well, let's describe an ego death. First, we must define what an ego is (source for all of the following quotes):

Ego: "The ego is a sense of self that you develop at a young age." and, "-relates to your feelings about your own importance and abilities.".

*cough "I'm the family fuckup and poor man's version of Ford because that's what people taught me to believe in my youth." cough*

And an ego death "-is the (often instantaneous) realization that you are not truly the things you've identified with, and the "ego" or sense of self you've created in your mind is a fabrication. In some instances, it can offer a profound feeling of peace and connectedness with all that is, as the walls of separation the ego creates come crumbling down."

*cough "I'm not Ford's poor copy, I'm not a fuckup, I have worth, and I realize this in my literal mind as I pull this expression-

-of total peace as the walls of my mind literally BURN around me" cough*

And, "When one comes through on the other side having released all the things they've identified with, with only their true spirit left, Kaiser says, they begin to live from a place of pure love."

*cough "I'll hold a picture of the ones I love and realize self-love as my mind burns around me because this is who I really am: a man who protects and loves my family and my family loves me" cough*

Cheeky asides, well... aside, are you seeing what I'm getting at, folks? Look, I can't prove that Hirsch and crew intended all this, but in my opinion: you wanna know why there are so many gags of Stan or versions of him melting or burning in the show? Why fire is such an important symbol surrounding him? Why there are so many times he's killed his own identity and became a "new" man again and again and again, be it as a young grifter, or as a drifter who became his brother to bring him back again, or as an old man who "killed" his own mind to save the world and his memories returned?

Because it's ego death. The rebirth of true self from a lie you were living. That's literally what Stan's arc is a metaphor for. Even better, he reaches his character arc's zenith when he does this:

That's not an old man punching a stupid little bastard. That's an old man punching what threatens his family, punching his own past, punching his own demons, punching his brother's demon, punching his prior identity, and - given that we know that Bill is a symbol of ego now - punching the personification of literal ego and letting it burn. There are, let's count, seven symbolic meanings in that punch at the very least. Maybe eight if you count that the rightside-up triangle is the alchemical symbol for fire, and by Stan beating it, it's symbolism of his defeating the fire that's eating his memories AKA why he gets his memories back. I could find more, probably.

And yes, the chubby old conman we love so much - and is the opposite of spiritual both in action and in Hirsch's words (he's said Stan is an atheist as an adult) literally has a character arc where he attains spiritual enlightenment that aligns with the god of the Gravity Falls universe - the Axolotl, who has no ego as Hirsch said - hidden under many layers of symbolism. I don't know if Hirsch and the writing crew planned this with Stan, but holy damn... this is what I meant when I said that Stan is the best written character in Gravity Falls, even if this part was unintentional. There are just so many layers of meaning here.

And the best part? Stan was this hero all along. Everything we cheer him on for - be it punching zombies to protect his niblings or spending three decades of his life trying to get his brother back - is when he's being selfless and empathetic. We love Stan as a character because he has a big heart. He's a good person because, as we described above, he is - through beating ego in a universe where its god represents a lack of ego - godly.

No, fangirls, put the sexy Hunkle art down. I mean literally spiritually godly in the Gravity Falls universe, at least in the way good and evil is portrayed in the themes and worldbuilding. No, I'm not exaggerating, either. Let's return to that quote about the Axolotl's powers and why he's stronger than Bill:

"-that a being that has no ego, thinks on a long scale, and does have empathy is actually stronger than him (Bill) because of those things."

Well... guess what Stan does? He loses his ego so hard he regularly kills his own identity multiple times in his life and goes through a symbolic ego death, he thinks on a long scale (thirty years long), and is empathetic and selfless to the point of sacrifice. And the Axolotl in real life lore? Xolotl, the god of Aztec myth? Guess what he's a god of (source):

Why I highlighted "vulture"? Honestly, this is just a neat little thing I wanted to point out, and was a part of a massive theory I was writing about Stan and Bill that sadly never came to fruition (although I may return to it someday), but here's a hint: what was Stan and Ford's school mascot in New Jersey?

I'll let you take away from all the above what you will. Let's just say: there are a LOT of similarities between Stan and the Axolotl and its real life god counterpart, Xolotl. Does that that mean he's literally the Axolotl when I say he's godly in the Gravity Falls setting? Maybe not.

Here's one last odd something that caught my eye. This is also a leftover from that theory I mentioned above, but I'll just... leave this here, because I don't think anyone else has ever pointed it out before and it expands on what I've been talking about:

Stan in the opening. The first time we see this guy, technically. He's sitting in his favorite chair. And as we all know, he turns to look at something. But just where the hell does he turn to look?

Half of you are like, "Well, what? What's he looking at?". There's a blue glow to his right, and you know what that blue glow is? The tank, which happens to have...

Could be a coincidence, maybe unintentional, but it's... kind of odd, not gonna lie. To have a character that embodies the traits of the setting's god look over at the setting's god the first time viewers see him. Just... a bit strange... and Xolotl was also a shapeshifter god, and given that Stan goes through so many identities in his life... and axolotls are able to regenerate limbs and so are a symbol of healing and rebirth like Stan - whose whole story is about healing and having multiple "rebirths" - is...

Anyways, I've gotten far off track mentioning things from that theory just for fun that I never posted. I may still post it, so I won't spoil all of it or list any more of the very odd coincidences between Stan and the Axolotl, but all you need to know from this post is that Stan shares a lot of similarities with his setting's god in symbolism, and embodies the power of the Axolotl AKA godliness in the Gravity Falls universe: no ego, selflessness, and knowing how to play a long game, because those are exactly the traits he uses to defeat Bill, as well as the traits that help him resolve his character arc wound.

So... now what?

I'm not really sure what to put here, to be honest. This post was a lot more meandering than Ford's was, but that's because there are so many different aspects of Stan's writing that are amazing, especially in symbolism. I hope it was coherent and made sense. A part of me was considering leaving out the ego death and Axolotl parts, but I thought it interesting enough to keep in. Let me know your thoughts!

[swoo0zy]

wander is DEF fucked emotionally i jyst didnt feel like fitting 2 paragraphs into 1 image also. comeduc effect ig BUT YEAH I SIGN UNDER EVERY WORD

this is starryeyed to me

[iscdisc]

Whiteboard doodles for today !

Tang Shen supremacy 5ever- 🫶

I desperately want a 2012 timeline to exist where Shredder gets redeemed (At least, as much as he can realistically speaking-) and Tang Shen never passes away- But I know it's kind of impossible for both those things to exist at the same time,, 😭 Lmao

But imagine if Yoshi (Splinter) acknowledged Saki's (Shredder's) deteriorating mental health (Which is canon. Have you seen this man in Season 4? LMAO) and tries to reach out more. Despite knowing how much his brother wants his dead. Despite knowing he's the reason his wife is gone and his daughter didn't know he existed for years / painted him as her Mother's murderer.

Because if you really dissect Saki as a character, he's kind of an understandable / "relatable" antagonist-?? His biological Father (Honestly whole family I'm sure-) was murdered by his new adoptive Father (Yoshi's), his entire clan was taken out and he was swiftly indoctrinated into the Hamato Clan as an infant, I'm sure he practically got the Naruto treatment from the Hamato Clan (Always being judged for descending from the Foot Clan, like he asked for that or something-), Yoshi presumably was treated significantly better than him + was most definitely the favorite child between the two of them when it came to their Father-

This is getting a little theoretical here, since we don't exactly know the timeline between Tang Shen and Yoshi & Saki, but my personal opinion is that:

Saki met Tang Shen first- He had a very surreal connection with her and finally felt understood by somebody / wasn't treated differently because of his bloodline connections, right. Probably because he still has a lot of growth to do as a person, they had a falling out and the relationship ended (Tang Shen absolutely being the one to call it off-). Then after some time she ends up being in a romantic relationship with Yoshi and stays with him. To me, this is the most logical course of events considering what we see in the S3 episode, "Tale of the Yokai"-

But the reason I explained all this is because I feel like this is yet another thing that Saki feels the Hamato Clan has stolen from him. He has nothing, everything that he did have was taken from him, and he's treated as some sort of vile creature that needs to be "shown the proper path". I also want to throw out the possibility that their Father (Yoshi's Father-) being an unreliable narrator, since we don't get a lot of context behind the Foot Clan and whether or not they were actually bad people- I know historically speaking, the Foot Clan has always been the villains in this franchise, but for 2012 specifically we never truly got any proof of that (in my opinion) prior to Shredder's reign as head of the Foot- You know what I mean? (Though I know this is yet another thing that can be chalked up to poor writing / world building-)

During the same episode, "Tale of the Yokai", we witness Saki openly call out Yoshi for not caring about Tang Shen enough and for not caring about him. This is something I'd also love to get into at some point, since I think this would've been a really deep and complicated Character Arc for Splinter to have potentially gone through ! Because in my personal opinion, I don't think Splinter doesn't care about the people that he claims to care about + love immensely, I just think he doesn't show it in the way that he believes he is showing it- He doesn't always understand how his actions are being perceived by those people, you know what I mean?? That's exactly why I say Shredder should have had a Redemption Arc and Splinter should have been a huge part of that, because at the end of the day you can understand why Saki is so upset as a person-?? All he wanted was somebody to genuinely love him for who he was and not try to change him or blame him for something he wasn't even alive for at the time. I think Splinter really needed to prove to him that he does love him. I also think Splinter should go through similar efforts with his sons first before making an attempt with Saki- Since I know a lot of people have issues with his parenting / feel he didn't love any of his sons except Leo (Which I half agree, half disagree- Also talking about Splinter's lack of self-awareness or situational awareness sometimes, I feel like that's why he never really addressed the favoritism with Leo.,, Because he was his Father's favorite child, so why would he have that kind of self-reflection when he didn't notice it between himself and his brother- You know? 😭).

The point is, I think Saki is just a deeply hurt / scarred man and because he was constantly left his own devices and quite frankly self-isolated, he just got worse and worse,, You can honestly see that deterioration throughout the series with how delusional he becomes towards the end- I promise I'll stop yapping after this, but can we talk about the moment that Shredder had during the S4 episode, "The Super Shredder" when he was describing constantly seeing Splinter in his nightmares and him having this condescending face all the time-?? 😭

[elodieunderglass]

FAQ May 2025

(wtf is #eggs for killie, etc)

Killie / Throw Your Heart Over

okay, so I apologise, because KILLIE is A LOT OF THIS TUMBLR at the moment. but also I don't.

Killie is an original character. he's an angry little racehorse jockey with an unfortunate psychic connection to his rancid racehorse frenemy (O Holy Thunder), a redemption-arc relationship with his nice nerdy boyfriend (Derek), an elusive twin brother (Charlie) and a messy, rambling family of horse-obsessed weirdos who are overly-invested in the fascinating, complex, dirty, problematic and unhinged world of horse racing. he is a short athletic ginger jock like an angry little wet cat, who is always getting injured, and we love him for this. at some point his book (Throw Your Heart Over) will get written (probably). but as I wasn't actually expecting to do this in real life, at the moment, we write comics and AUs and fanfiction about him. yes I know this is backwards, shut up, WE ARE HAVING FUN, and maybe it's actually FORWARDS. (by the way - does anyone know how to write a book?)

@aqueenvictorious kindly and brilliantly did this roundup.

Eggs for Killie

I will have to be UNPRECEDENTLY brave and work VERY hard to write a book about Killie. so I said that if everyone else was very brave with me, and attacked a similarly scary creative project by the end of March, Killie could have an egg (eggs are a treat for him). The intention was to leverage each other's courage and momentum to all make progress together, with accountability and a deadline. to add urgency, Killie was trying to stay fit to (metaphorically) ride in the Grand National, a large UK steeplechase, on April 5th.

I thought we’d have 5 eggs to chase up. There were over 150 eggs for Killie by the time I had to close the inbox. It was an incredible outpouring of vitality that I’m still astonished and impressed by.

With incredible kindness and intelligence and bravery and truth, @patheticprogrammingperson took on the task of making the Eggs for Killie tumblr, where you can submit your intention of finishing a creative project/WIP in 30 days. The blog will accept your ask and assign you a 30-day check in, to which you can reply with your progress and receive one egg 🥚 to throw at Killie’s head. Go ahead and try it!

The Leucism Channel (open to other colour morphs)

I have had this tag for over 10 years! I collect leucistic animals, but I am also interested in other colour morphs. Rather than trying to run separate channels, I am now putting non-leucistic animals in this tag.

Horrible things with legs

Apparently this tag is only 8 years old, but I genuinely think that's a mistake on tumblr's part. I think I've been running it since the Palaeozoic era.

what do you like, do?

this is such a good question. here's how I tried to answer it.

Works In Progress

His Delicious Materials - chapters 10/12, IN PROGRESS

Dungeon Meshi x His Dark Materials fusion. Tumblr tag https://www.tumblr.com/elodieunderglass/tagged/his%20delicious%20materials

A Weasel Heart in Defiance - chapters 12/20, IN PROGRESS

Dungeon Meshi x His Dark Materials fusion. Tumblr tag https://www.tumblr.com/elodieunderglass/tagged/weasel%20heart%20in%20defiance

Swan Comics for the Palestine Children's Relief Fund.

general swan comics.

I am sousverre on AO3 and I have a bluesky.

Sorry, I don't do fundraisers as asks. my fundraiser policy for the past 10 years has been that I'll signal boost for mutuals.

thanks for your time and attention. goodbye.

[kathrahender]

Tired of seeing Strickler's hate from Blinky's fans so I'm making this post to say something (controversial or not): Blinky is not perfect. Strickler is not a perfect character, of course, but Blinky isn't a perfect character neither. No matter what you try to say about Strickler, or how much you hate him, Blinky also made mistakes.

Yeah, Strickler did a bad things in the show:

First, he worked for Gunmar. But while he could have decided other thing, he didn't serve Gunmar "because he wanted to" or because he hated humanity (like Gunmar and other characters did, who btw don't get as much hate as Strickler does), but because he needed to serve Gunmar. Trollmarket hated changelings and considered them "impures", and humans didn't even know about them. So it's not a surprise he and other changelings decided to turn to the troll who was going to "make it better for them" bringing the Eternal Night (and if they got deceived by Gunmar, it's not their fault. Everyone can fell for the lies of another person).

Second, yes, he fought Jim, and that was "wrong" because he could have decided to be on his side since the beginning. After all, Jim not only was a teenager, he was also his favorite student, so he could have supported him. Besides, telling someone "Don't you see? I'm only trying to protect you" and then throwing a knife at him it's not very protective but anyways- Strickler didn't try to kill Jim. He said "I'll kill you if I need to" in Recipe for Disaster, yes, and fought against Jim in season 1 part 1, but he had more fighting skills than Jim. If he had wanted to kill him, he would have done it. But he didn't. Because the only thing he wanted was to keep him out of his way. It was easy to kill Principal Levit, and he could have done the same with Jim if he had wanted to (and no, he didn't decide not to kill Jim because of the consequences, because in Bittersweet Sixteen the stalkling could have killed Jim and Stickler wasn't at all happy with the idea of Jim dying).

Thirdly, he woke up Angor Rot to stop Jim. He shouldn't have done that, and it wasn't "right" (Not only because of what he ordered Angor Rot to do, but because of how he treated Angor Rot), but it was perfectly understandable. Jim wanted to free the familiars of the changelings from the Darklands, and that meant the changelings would have had to keep being trolls forever -without being able to change to their human forms- so it wasn't a surprise Strickler tried to stop Jim (despite he could have chosen to talk to Jim instead of fighting him-).

And fourthly, he entwined his fate with Barbara's. Doing something like that it's horrible. And I'm not justifying what he did. But in that moment, when he was going to entwine his fate with Barbara's, for the first time in a lot of episodes, he showed a little remorse. And that means that he isn't the irredeemable villain some Trollhunters fans want him to be. He wasn't flawless, he wasn't perfect, but he worked to be a better person. He gave Jim Gunmar's eye, he came back to Arcadia in season 2 and helped Jim to defeat Gunmar in season 3, and he sacrificed himself in ROTT for him.

So yeah, while I kinda understand why some people consider Strickler's redemption arc "a bad redemption arc", I don't understand why he is hated by a part of the fandom so much. Specially knowing that some Trollhunters fans are also Star Wars fans and they don't hate Darth Vader as much as they hate Strickler. I also didn't like some things about his redemption, but again I understand that it was because of the lack of episodes, not because he was a bad written redeemed villain.

And it's funny how some people hate him, and adore Blinky, when he isn't perfect either. I can tell Strickler has a lot of flaws, but Blinky is not a troll without them.

Blinky was prejudiced about the changelings, and not just a little. He was very prejudiced against the changelings, and all because of what? Because the changelings were the product of troll babies being stolen and transformed into half-human half-troll creatures? Because they weren't full trolls? Because the human part of them made them impure? You know that sounds awfully similar to what the purebloods of Harry Potter think about halfbloods. That's not a very good reason to hate the changelings honestly. And it's not that I'm biased about Strickler (and want Blinky to be some things he isn't), because Blinky in the show talked about how "bad" changelings were when he told Jim they existed. Besides, even when Strickler came back to Arcadia, the first thing he believed was that Strickler was working with Gunmar. Even after he gave Jim Gunmar's eye in season 1. So yeah, he was definitely prejudiced against changelings and that's a fact.

Apart from that, he wasn't a good mentor at first. Yeah, of course, the destiny of the world was in Jim's hands and the weight of the world was on Jim's shoulders and all of that, but Jim was a teenager. He wasn't a troll like Kanjigar or like the previous trollhunters, who trained for decades after they were chosen by the amulet. Jim was a human. A teenager. A person with other worries: his mother, his friend, his grades. And one of the first things Blinky said to Jim when he talked about the school? "I assure you, the relevance escapes me". This only shows one thing: that Blinky at first only cared about Jim being the trollhunter, and that he probably wanted Jim to leave his past life behind and only care about the trollhunter' duties.

And while Blinky got over the second flaw, he didn't get over the prejudice about changelings. Strickler did fix most of his flaws during the show.

To end this post, I want to say that of course, you have the right to love the characters you want, and hate the characters you want, but don't be hypocritical about it. Yes. Strickler was a villain. Blinky was not. But both have flaws. Both made mistakes. Neither of them is perfect. So ackowledge the flaws of the characters you love when you need to, and don't act as if they did nothing wrong when they did.

[rosemarymoodboards]

Why Neither Aang Nor Zuko Were Right for Katara (And Why That’s Not a Bad Thing)

Katara is one of the most emotionally rich and complex characters in Avatar: The Last Airbender.

She’s compassionate, fierce, morally grounded, and driven by her own internal compass. But when it comes to romance, the show failed her because instead of asking what she needed, it only asked who deserved her.

Let’s talk about why neither Aang nor Zuko were the right match for her, despite what the fandom (and canon) tried to sell.

Aang Loved Katara But the Story Never Let Her Choose Him

On paper, Katara and Aang could have worked. Air and water are complementary. They went through war together. They clearly loved each other in some way.

But here’s the thing: Aang’s feelings were consistent and foregrounded. Katara’s were buried and undeveloped.

Her romantic feelings don’t evolve over time they just appear at the end because the plot needs it.

There’s no moment where Katara realizes she’s in love with Aang. There’s no mutual build-up. No shared romantic turning point. Instead, we get:

-One-sided tension

-An unreciprocated kiss

-A sudden, silent kiss at the end after the war is over, and after zero emotional resolution.

It reads like this: Aang earned her, so he gets her.

But Katara was never a prize. She was a person. And her emotional journey didn’t point to romance it pointed to healing, to grief, to self-discovery. The fact that her romantic arc was stapled onto Aang’s doesn’t feel earned. It feels like narrative obligation.

Zuko and Katara Were Intense But Intensity Isn’t Intimacy

The Zutara ship is compelling in theory: fire and water, enemies to allies, deep emotional tension. And they do share some raw, powerful moments especially in The Southern Raiders.

But let’s be honest: trauma bonding is not romantic compatibility.

Their strongest connection comes from shared pain. Zuko helps her confront her past, and it’s beautiful. But it’s closure, not chemistry. It’s healing, not a hint that they should kiss.

There’s no romantic subtext from Katara’s side. No longing looks. No hesitation or hope.

Just intensity and intensity without trust becomes volatility.

And let’s not forget: Zuko betrayed her

He sided with Azula and nearly killed her. She held onto that pain for a long time. They barely have time to rebuild trust, let alone develop a loving foundation.

If they got together, it would be on unresolved tension and projected fantasy, not emotional safety.

Katara Was Always Framed Through the Lens of Other People’s Arcs

This is the real issue.

Katara was vital to both Aang and Zuko’s journeys:

She grounded Aang, comforted him, forgave him, mothered him.

She challenged Zuko, distrusted him, helped him become better.

But when it came to her needs, her desires, her emotional resolution the show gave us silence.

We never see Katara talk about what love means to her.

We never see her struggle with choosing herself vs. choosing someone else.

We never see her define her own romantic needs, because the narrative decided that her role was to be chosen, not to choose.

Whether it's Aang’s destined love interest or Zuko’s redemption companion, Katara becomes a function of the men around her. That’s not romance. That’s narrative sacrifice.

Maybe Katara Didn’t Need a Love Story at All

This is the take that gets overlooked.

Maybe the strongest ending for Katara wouldn’t have been choosing between Aang or Zuko.

Maybe it would’ve been choosing herself.

Because here’s a girl who lost her mother, carried the weight of her tribe, became a master, led a revolution, and stayed emotionally available through it all. That’s power. That’s healing. That’s arc worthy.

And instead of letting her arrive at a place of inner clarity, the show rushes her into a kiss with no romantic arc of her own.

Conclusion: Katara Wasn’t Meant to Be a Reward

Whether it’s Aang’s long suffering crush or Zuko’s redemptive spark, both love stories treat Katara as something that happens to them.

But she was her own story. And she deserved a romance that treated her that way.

Letting Katara choose herself or at least letting her romance grow from mutual, earned connection would’ve been revolutionary.

Instead, we got a pairing that satisfied the hero’s journey, not hers.

[tizeline]

Ohhh~ just WAIT until his bros know about how Donnie is considering kindra his arch nemesis more then his brothers.

I think Mikey would be mad because if Donnie doesn't consider them arch nemesis then they're not important and if they're not important then there's no chance fir redemption arc because as he sees it: Donnie think they're "side characters" the not important characters

So like here's the thing, Donnie's brothers don't want to be considered enemies at all by Donnie. So if anything they'd be relieved that they haven't gotten assigned the arch-enemy role by him.

That being said, the fact that Donnie is getting along way better with his supposed "arch-enemy" than his own brothers is very insulting, let's be honest XD. Donnie actually likes spending time with Kendra, whether they're fighting or just hanging out, meanwhile he's just avoiding Raph, Leo and Mikey unless it's to specifically stop their plans.

What's worse, when The Drax Trio first find out about Kendra and her rivalry with Donnie, they try to get involved. Because wow there's a human that their brother actually considers an enemy?? This is the perfect opportunity for them to save Donnie from this threat and maybe get him to trust them! So they show in the middle of one of Donnie's and Kendra's play-battles and are all like "this girl bothering you bro??😡😡😡" and are absolutely flabbergasted when Donnie ends up defending Kendra against them! Cause Donnie doesn't actually want Kendra to get hurt for real, also she's his enemy not theirs, they can't just insert themelves into their pre-established rivalry dynamic!

But yeah as you said it, Raph, Leo and Mikey realizing that Donnie treat them like bothersome side characters very much bums them out lol

[leupagus]

Honestly? I think it's because Langdon knows about her past addiction issues and avoids her specifically because of them. It's not so much that he doesn't know anything about her, but rather that he knows just enough about her to want to give her a wide berth. And I think there's two different reasons for that, aka the reason before he became an addict and the reason after he became an addict.

From the way Langdon talks about addiction and addicts throughout the season, it's clear to me that he has MASSIVE prejudices toward them. Think of what he says to Robby — "Could an addict do what I can?" He does not respect the addicts he treats, even. One of the people he steals drugs from is poor Louie, who (from his conversation with Robby later) openly admits that he's trying to kill himself by inches via his alcoholism. Langdon probably does not know this, but he still deprives Louie of medication that will help him simply because he believes - rightly or wrongly! - that Louie wouldn't take the pills anyway and that they should go to someone (ie him) who's more deserving.

And I don't think that kind of attitude just sprang up once he himself became an addict; I think they're part of a longstanding prejudice. Patrick Ball has mentioned that Langdon comes from Appalachia, and as someone with family from there, I know how one could understandably confuse the systemic issues within the region for "well these individuals just fucked up their own lives." I've done it myself! The absolute rage you can feel toward a loved one or friend who struggles with addiction can blind you to how addiction works, even if you should know better. And my guess is that that's where Langdon's attitude comes from — seeing addiction up close without really internalizing the reasons why it happened other than the old saw of "personal responsibility." Langdon went to med school to become a doctor, to save lives, but we see him treat those who are dying or dead with a sort of impatience that speaks to a lack of empathy, similar to what I've often seen in people who think of addiction as a moral failing rather than an illness. And moral failings are often seen as irrevocable failings — ones that you cannot recover from.

Now, imagine Langdon meeting Cassandra "Cassie" McKay, a woman almost a decade his senior, who's in recovery and probably has a criminal history (the ankle monitor and the cops' mention that she's a "flight risk" indicated to me that whatever happened between her and Chad's new girlfriend, it's not the first time she's been in trouble with the law) but who has nonetheless gotten herself through med school and is now doing her residency — and from what we see of her, doing a really great job. She is open about her addiction (people might've missed it but she casually mentions being a "friend of Bill" to the sommelier lady) rather than shamefully hiding it, something Langdon may have never seen before. How would that impact him?

I think it might have gone some way toward changing his mind about addicts, but it still might've been more unsettling than enlightening. Langdon tends to have two methods of dealing with things he dislikes: avoidance or hostility (see: Santos). It's entirely possible that he and McKay had a similarly contentious period in their working relationship the previous year, once Langdon found out about McKay's recovery; they worked it out somehow and then they mostly stayed out of each other's way thereafter. Both of them are, I think, professional enough to work well together despite not really liking each other, and they're two of the only doctors (I think?) who we never see trading casual chitchat (someone correct me if I'm wrong here!), but they're perfectly cordial and I think they both respect each other. But! I think Langdon watched McKay pretty closely in that first year for her to "earn" his respect.

Then, after he became an addict himself, I think he believed that McKay was the most likely to realize what was going on. I don't know that that's true; being an addict yourself can sometimes give you a level of insight into other people's addiction, but from what the show's implied McKay was an addict long before she went into the medical field and the whole "stealing meds from patients" thing is very different form of addiction than buying drugs off the street. (Not better or worse, to be clear, just that the mechanisms are different.) But Langdon's paranoia is clear in season one, with him bristling at Collins calling him an "adrenaline junkie" and working double-time to undermine both Santos and Robby once he realizes they're going to do something about him. He is not thinking clearly about his actions and so I can imagine his thought process regarding McKay is, "if I just stay out of her way she won't notice anything's changed." And it seems to have worked; by the end of the season Langdon's been all but fired and McKay is none the wiser, just like most of the rest of the staff. But Langdon doesn't know that.

(BTW this is not to say Langdon is a bad person at all; certainly I don't think he's meant to be seen as a villain or unsympathetic! I just think he's a really, really complicated character who's got a glaring blind spot — just as all doctors have, just as all people have — and I think it could explain why McKay is the one doctor we don't see him interacting with very much at all.)

Anyway sorry OP for this wall of text but the relationship between Langdon and McKay is SO fascinating to me, I hope to see them thrown together a lot more in season 2!

i find it so interesting that langdon knows next to nothing about mckay and thinks of her as a private person, but she thinks of the ed as people who have her back and is shown to have a really close relationship with mateo… like I don’t know that she is a particularly private person? from collins interacting with chad it’s clear that mckay has talked/complained about chad to collins before

[hollowed-theory-hall]

What are your thoughts on the possibility of Petunia redeeming herself or atoning for her abuse of Harry? This is more ramblings and musing then coherent ask, sorry.

You mentioned in a previous post that while she might not love him, she is concerned for her nephew’s safety - as well as that her emotions towards Harry are quite complex (similarly to her emotions towards and relationship with Lily, post-magic revelation).

There are many fics where Petunia does eventually break the cycle of abuse she and Vernon perpetuate on Harry (but usually this is the result of either divorcing Vernon or her husband outright dying), but I’m kind of curious as to what you think in your analysis of her character.

Petunia is a tough nut to crack for me when it comes to fics where she is redeemed.

At the very least, the extreme neglect and enforced silence that Harry is raised in just…it’s terrible when you look at it more deeply than the early books intend.

Which is made worse still by later on, when she swings a frying pan at his head (Chamber of Secrets, I think?).

In the first books, I get that as the target audience was young kids, not much gravitas was placed in Harry’s treatment in the hands of the Dursley’s - they were the bad family he escaped into the magical world from, the anti-thesis to the Weasley family later, meant to seem more caricature and buffoonish.

If that frying pan had hit Harry, though? Depending on how hard Petunia swung it, no matter that she was concerned for Dudley (after Harry didn’t even use magic, just pretended to), that could have killed him.

We know Dudley beat Harry quite often with his friends, and Vernon at the very least threatened to do so (and from some of Harry’s lines, likely went through with said threats at times), but little about Petunia’s abuse of Harry is mentioned except in the very early books - her shaving his hair except for his bangs for example, leaving him to go to school mortified - so there’s no indication that she regularly threatened him physically over the emotional abuse, but still.

Not to mention the potential for neglect/abuse that Petunia herself went through, Lily being their parent’s favored child over her, how that in turn also affected her relationship with her sister, and then how that is turned on to Harry…

Petunia’s character, and redemption/atonement for Harry’s abuse is such an interesting concept.

Personally, I was never interested in a Petunia redemption arc. I think she's just as bad, if not worse than Vernon. So I'm going to have to disagree with you.

It's not that Petunia's sitting there feeling bad about how she and Vernon treat Harry and wish she could stop it — she doesn't. It's very clear throughout the books that she isn't remorseful at all.

Her feelings about Harry are complex because Harry is Lily's son. And as bitter and jealous as Petunia is, I think, she used to love her sister. Used to even be protective of her. So, deep down, I don't think she wants Harry dead or seriously hurt (to her standard), but at the same time, she feels justified in hurting him and treating him as subhuman.

See, Vernon truly does hate wizards. He fears magic, he loves normalcy, and he despises the "freaks" that essentially represent everything he hates. He's straightforward and completely honest in his approach.

The reason I sometimes consider Petunia worse, is becouse she isn't honest, she's a fucking hypocrite.

She wanted to be a witch. She wanted to be special and go to wizard school like Lily. She was jealous of Lily that she got to do magic and go to Hogwarts.

Petunia started calling wizards freaks and latched onto normalcy as a way to cope with not being special. I mean, she was told that magic exists, that there's a whole special world of magic out there, but that she isn't special enough to become part of it.

So young Petunia coped by going in the opposite direction. She became as normal as can be. Started claiming anyone special was a "freak" even when deep down she fucking knows that if she got a chance she'd leave and go to Hogwarts in a heartbeat. That deep down she wants to be special.

She transferred that jealousness and bitterness, then toward the wizarding world as a whole onto Harry personally, which is so unfair. Like, I find it disgusting, I find it disgusting how righteous she feels treating him the way they do. She is very similar to Snape in this regard (projecting her problems with Harry's parent onto Harry), just without any of the redeeming qualities since she isn't even all that smart, and she wouldn't give a shit if all her neighbors died one day (Snape would). And Snape was better to Harry than Petunia, let's be real, being an ass to a kid is not the same as starving a kid and locking him in a cupboard.

But I do want to point out, that she doesn't have the excuse of a cycle of abuse (I'm saying excuse because that's what it is. Tragic backstory can be used to explain characters' actions but it doesn't absolve them) becouse Petunia wasn't abused or particularly neglected. We have no indication she was, and I think it's more likey she was treated well.

We're told their parents loved having a witch in the house by Petunia in PS, but when we see Snape's memories, apparently their parents urged a pre-Hogwarts Lily not to do magic. They feared it until it was explained to them. Petunia is biased in what she says. Because while they were supportive of Lily once they understood, I don't believe they ever mistreated Petunia, and I don't think she is meant to be read as neglected.

I mean, Lily wasn't even home most of the year, Petunia was getting all of their parents' attention year-round, and during the breaks, they probably dotted on Lily because they hadn't seen her in months. This isn't neglect or abuse. This is Petunia being a petulant child who didn't get to be showered in attention all the time because her parents wanted to hear from the daughter they only got to see, like, 3 months a year.

I don't think either Lily or Petunia were abused or neglected, and I find it somewhat silly to try and justify Petunia by giving her a tragic backstory when the books make her reasons to hate Harry very clear. These being jealousy and pettiness.

So, I'm not interested in a redemption arc or atonement arc for Petunia or Vernon for that matter. I think neither of them deserves it and the only atonement I'd be interested in for them is a prison sentence for child abuse and neglect.

Yes, Petunia may not beat Harry physically as often as Vernon or Dudley, but she lets them. She watched him be chased by Marge's dog and laughed. She approved of Vernon's and Dudley's treatment of Harry because if she didn't, she wouldn't have let it happen. She stopped Vernon from throwing Harry out of the house when Dumbledore sent a threatening letter to her in OotP; if she cared to stop the abuse she didn't actively participate in herself, she had the power to do so, but didn't. Becouse she thought Harry deserved it. She mistreated him just as much. Looking at him with disgust and scorn and calling him a freak is abuse. Starving and locking him up is abuse. She isn't any better than Vernon.

The only Dursley I can see redeemed is Dudley. He started his journey in the books (btw, in that scene, Petunia thinks Dudley is "too sweet" for telling Harry he isn't a waste of space) and he actually was a child, like Harry. He did what his parents did like every child does. But he shows signs of improvement after Harry saves him from the dementors. He realizes his parents are full of shit.

So, yeah, Dudley is the only Dursley I'm interested in a redemption for. Petunia and Vernon deserve a prison sentence.

[axolartandfics]

TRANSFORMERS PRIME RANT

content warning: discussions of physical/psychological abuse

I’m going to try to write a rant but we’ll see how good I am at stringing my words together.

I love Transformers Prime with my whole heart, particularly Starscream, and despite and because of this, I don’t like the way his character plays out in season three.

After Starscream rejoins the decepticons at the end of season two, the abuse he receives from Megatron gets way worse. Megatron physically beat Starscream quite often in season one, and as season three progresses, this treatment is on full display and gets so much worse. And these abuse scenes are genuinely horrible and upsetting. Megatron physically dominates Starscream, who is much smaller and thinner, and the show spends a lot of time emphasizing his fear and screams as Megatron beats him.

Alongside Starscream’s abuse getting worse, he also gets significant Stockholm syndrome in season three, which makes the whole situation one thousand times ickier. While in season one Starscream tried to usurp and fight back against Megatron, now he looks up to the person who is actively and regularly beating him half to death.

But there’s nothing wrong with depicting a toxic character dynamic, it’s how the narrative frames it that matters.

Starscream gets treated worse by Megatron while thinking better of him as the show goes on. And the only people we get to see this ugly situation through the eyes of are Starscream and Megatron, who both think this is fine in one way or another.

We never get to see any other character acknowledge the abusive relationship. The autobots are totally oblivious or totally uncaring that it’s happening, and you can bet the other Decepticons aren’t going to do anything about it. Even after Megatron leaves behind his goal of oppression, he shows no regret of how he’d treated Starscream, the person who he had arguably made suffer the most. He just shouts at him and makes him flinch one last time then abandons him. He continues to mistreat him then leaves him behind. Leaves behind the person who he had physically and psychologically destroyed for thousands if not millions of years. Although I don’t expect Megatron to show sympathy for Starscream, since his ‘redemption’ was just him retiring and leaving everyone else to clean up the mess he made. (I have good and bad feelings on Megatron’s ending, but I don’t want to get too sidetracked)

What matters is, without Megatron acknowledging the horribleness of the situation, and without the autobots being aware of it, the only person who can acknowledge how toxic the situation was is Starscream.

But he doesn’t get this chance. His arc ends when the Predacons beat him up for revenge.

Starscream is an abuse victim, and he is never given a chance to heal. No character, himself included, ever fully acknowledges how problematic the situation is. He is never given a chance to be powerful. Over and over again he is forced to be weak and without agency. From the start of season three to the end of the movie, his character is a slow trickle into suffering more and more, being beaten down again and again until he doesn’t get back up.

When watching the show, I was fine with the amount of frightening abuse they were depicting on screen because I thought they would have some amount of healing from it. But it just gets worse and worse until the show ends and that’s it. It just feels like abuse for the sake of abuse at this point.

But the thing is, I’m not even opposed to Starscream having a bad ending. Let me explain.

I think it makes sense after him being conniving and evil and power hungry and cruel for his actions to catch up for him, and for him to be humbled in one way or another.

The thing is, they depicted Starscream’s fall to shame without ever giving him a moment of power. There’s no climax in season three where he takes control of his life again. There’s no moment where he gets to be more than humiliated and shamed.

Starscream is a victim, and he’s an abuser as well. He treats everyone around him horribly. He is a perpetuator of the cycle of abuse, where, after being abused by Megatron and others, he started to replicate their cruelty in order to have power.

The story needed to recognize him as both an abuser and a victim. It seemed to think these cancel out. That Starscream being beat by the Predacons in the end is the consequence of his abusive actions towards others coming back to haunt him. But just as a middle school bully doesn’t deserve to go home and be bullied by their sibling, an abuser does not deserve to be abused by another person. No one deserves to be abused.

Starscream being abused doesn’t pay for his crimes. And he isn’t just being humbled for treating the predacons badly; he’s being tortured.

As an abuser, Starscream deserved to see the consequences of his actions in some way, but as a victim, Starscream deserved any kind of moment of victory.

All this to say, this isn’t about wether or not Starscream deserved to be beat by the predacons (although I maintain that we should have better mindsets about paying for our crimes than “abusers deserve abuse”). This is about the fact that he deserved to see a shred of honor before his fall as well.

This is about the fact that as an abuse victim, he is given not a shred of dignity or an acknowledgment of his pain. His descent in season three isn’t even a character arc. There’s no growth, no resolution, no rising or falling climax. Like I said before, it’s just him suffering over and over, until the series ends.

Starscream is perhaps a good, although tragic, depiction of an abuser: a character who treats others poorly until it finally catches up to him. But he is a bad and problematic depiction of a victim: someone who never gets to be seen, even by himself.

[godslush]

It is kind of interesting how the three 'stalkers' have very different approaches.

[Spoilers and Rambling]

Masked Shadow tries to be manipulative, but its blue-and-orange morality makes it fairly clear that it simply doesn't know that's a bad thing, and it will respectfully back off if told to stop.

Lyle is in denial (lmao); draws a line at the upfront appearance of amiability; incredibly shy and embarrassed in person, but boldly disrespectful of personal boundaries when he thinks he can hide it/get away with it.

Spine dgaf.

In short:

Shadow - Doesn't know what it's doing is wrong, doesn't hide it, apologizes.

Lyle - Knows what he's doing is wrong, hides it, doesn't apologize.

Spine - Doesn't care what it's doing is wrong, doesn't hide it, doesn't apologize.

---

Honestly, this makes Lyle the creepiest because you'd never find out what he was up to unless you do the 'evil' thing and heartlessly murder this seemingly perfectly harmless shy uwu bug man, meaning if you don't do that he'll continue to get away with it while giving off the impression he's your friend... How much of how he acts is genuine embarrassment over what he does? Or is he actually remorseless about stalking and merely acting embarrassed to throw people off the trail?

As someone who's dealt with real stalkers before (not for ME, but for friends/family etc.), perhaps I'm a little more prone to suspicion, and it's a big reason why I find Lyle fascinating and a little pathetic as a character who is fun to draw and write, but by no means like him. Until we know whether or not Lyle is just Like That or is merely acting Like That to mislead, I can't really stand behind him as a 'friend'. Not until HE addresses it up-front in a way that demonstrates actual remorse.

The only hint that there is remorse is breaking his heart by looking at his monster form... like you seeing him "for the monster he really is" in a physical sense reveals the metaphorical "monster" he was hiding... and even then, he treats it as if that's YOUR fault for breaking his trust, when he was the one hiding it from you rather than being up-front about it in the first place. ExCUSE me.

I hope we can get an extended interaction after that event that goes more into it; maybe he could even be convinced to apologize... I'm a sucker for a good redemption arc.

Spine being overt about it makes the decision to take it out less of a moral quandary and more obvious self-defense.