#he lives far. far away from society like the emo old man he is. perhaps near the sea of rust where he knows ppl wont get close | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

recycledcactus · 4 years ago

Text

so i’m really thinking about the Dream SMP as like, a world with civilians and stuff. because you know how when there was an election, our votes were canon, right? so what if there were regular ol’ villagers and civilians who lived in this world...

(also this is kinda based off of something @khizuo said a while back. also @phantom-clock, @strawberiitea, and @emo-and-confused, y’all might like this, idk)

reblogs appreciated :]

Warning: Long post ahead!!! (Basically me just skimming over all the events since Tommy had the first duel with Dream and then to the point where he and Tubbo faced off with Dream in sort of a civilian’s perspective)

I’m thinking about how people inhabited the lands of the whole DreamSMP, lived in those places and had homes and jobs in those places. There were people who followed their leaders. People who grew to question their leader’s morals. People who still remained after all the destruction. And people who left because nothing could ever be the same

I’m thinking about how some men, women, and even possibly some children went to war for their countries. They looked up to their leaders––their symbols of hope and freedom. They fought and died and some probably never made it home.

I’m thinking about how they went to bed one night, presuming they had lost the first war, only to wake up to cheering in the streets. They woke up to see their leader, Wilbur, and his closest friends laughing and hollering and yelling ‘We won!!’. Do you think they ever learned that Tommy sacrificed a life? Do you think they were told that? Or do you think they lived in blissful ignorance that a child died and gave up his discs for their country. Did they celebrate that day, thinking all was well?

Did they pass the walls of Eret’s castle with hatred in their gut?

What about Schlatt’s election? I wonder if people knew who this guy was. Wasn’t he just a stranger brought to their lands? Schlatt was originally there to help Pog2020 win, right? How did the citizens feel when the ram announced he’d be running too? Or worse, when he won? They must’ve been scared, right? Confused. Scared. Unsure. Curious, probably. And when Tommy and Wilbur were exiled. They had to watch their leaders be shot at, driven away by arrows and mad laughter. They watched Tubbo be called to the podium. Watched Schlatt grin at the teenager and announce him as his right hand man. They were helpless to Tubbo nervously leading Tommy and Wilbur far away. Did they riot? Cry out? Try to fight? Were they held back by the others? Perhaps some left the nation, too scared to stay.

Citizens probably slipped away in the night, past guards, and followed where they saw Tommy and Wilbur go. They probably found the two building their home and joined them, eventually setting up a system for other people on their side to come quickly. Did they work as double-agents in the shadows? I imagine they mined out Pogtopia and created little pockets of space to live in. Children’s laughter would ring out on all levels of the ravine. Patters of footsteps rung throughout the underground society. People would slip in and out with resources, information, and recruits. It was a small, bustling base. But it was home to the revolution.

They watched the great Blood God walk their halls, scared to be in his presence but ultimately in awe. They farmed silently by his side for hours, just to go to bed and wake up the next morning, finding he didn’t stop. That probably changed their vision of him, if only for a short while.

I wonder how they felt when Wilbur went insane.

Were the plans of bombing their old nation just rumours that echoed the caves? Or did they know the grim possibility of what could come?

When Technoblade murdered Tubbo, did cries ring out in the streets? I’d imagined they did. I’d imagine more riots. By both citizens and revolutionists. Fireworks danced in the skies but they were never a joyous sight after that day. Did people yell and scream at Techno as he massacred the leaders and founders of this server? Or did they dare to make a noise, too scared to meet an end like that?

Some of the adults gathered around the pit Wilbur made, watching the sickening show happen. They cringed at each of Wilbur’s little taunts. This was not their leader. This was not who they swore to follow.

I think some people left the lands after that.

They went into another war and thought they came out with a win. Schlatt was dead in the old drug van and it seemed things were at peace now. Many people disagreed with Tommy being at the podium––being in power––but not much was said. It couldn’t really get worse from Schlatt and Wilbur, right? Tubbo is elected and he accepts. There are cheers and cries of relief. Everyone’s tired but in a good mood. They don’t notice their old leader slip away. It only descends into more chaos from there. There are more fireworks, fighting, clanging of metal on metal. People no longer know which side is which––or even who attacked in the first place. Tommy is yelling something, and Techno is yelling something back. Did they notice Wilbur was gone? Did they start to realize the gravity of the situation? Did anyone suddenly just feel hopeless and accept that this was the end? The ground shakes, and people can’t tell if it was due to battle, or due to a winged man entering their world. Civilians and soldiers alike witness their home explode and burn to the ground. Did they have time to see Phil and Wilbur argue? Did they watch their former president get stabbed by his father? Or were they too distracted with Techno’s speech and the Withers and Tommy’s reaction to see anything? (A reminder was set into place: Do no mess with the Blood God). How many people do you think died that day? Soldiers and civilians alike? Children, even?

What did they do when their nation was nothing but a burning hole in the ground?

What did they do when they suddenly lost everything? When their homes were nothing but rubble and ash? When the bodies of their friends and family alike littered the gaping crater that was their nation?

Did they hold onto hope at the words of their new leader––the dream of a new L’Manburg? More people left, probably. Did the revolutionists take their stuff from Pogtopia and never enter that toxic crevice of a base again? Perhaps they put up tents and huts around the destroyed L’Manburg just like how it used to be in the early days. They set to work slowly rebuilding their country and tried their best to keep their spirits high. It wasn’t the end.

Philza was nice to them, albeit melancholy at times. They liked him. (Did they know what he did)?

How many people do you think yelled and took out their anger on Ghostbur? How many people do you think actually liked him?

Did they turn the site of the still-intact L’Mantree into a graveyard for their fallen friends and family?

I wonder how many people hated Tubbo being in power. Hated that a kid was leading their country. Or were they more pitying and angry at life for doing these things to children?

Did they know Tommy and the new kid, Ranboo, burning George’s house before Dream caught on? How many were terrified when the obsidian walls were put up? How many people were angry when Tommy went to court. Angry at Tommy for doing this? People probably either yelled that Tommy was just a kid, a victim of war and manipulation. Others probably yelled that ‘yes, this was all his fault, he should be punished for this’.

But were they prepared to see their conflicted leader exile his best friend?

Did they riot, scream, curse, and fight? Did they shout at Tubbo for being a terrible leader? Did they drive him into his home with their protests? Or were they stunned into silence at the gravity at the situation. He was a kid. He was a kid. He was a kid. They were kids. Did anyone try to find Tommy when he was in exile but ultimately get killed/escorted back to L’Manburg for their efforts? What did they think when Tubbo stumbled into their nation one day with tear-stained cheeks and puffy eyes, mumbling something about ‘Tommy’s dead’?

I wonder how many people lost respect for their president that day.

I wonder if they showered the famous bench in flowers, place notes of respect in Tommy’s house, and give him a grave under the L’Mantree next to Wilbur’s.

Was it a surprise when Philza fled the country? He was kind, yes, but he never seemed to enjoy himself. He always looked tied down. Were they happy he was going to find a better place to be, or were they angry if they knew just where exactly he was going? Were they horrified and disappointed in their government for forming a ‘butcher army’? How sick do you think they felt when they heard the ambitious whispers of Quackity and saw how his behaviours became small reflections of Schlatt? Were they terrified at the possibility that another dictator like Schlatt could arise into power? Did they watch Techno’s failed execution with satisfaction or with unease? I think some were more amazed seeing the powers of a Totem of Undying for the first time. (A second reminder was set into motion: Do not mess with the Blood God).

Was anyone brave enough to ask Quackity how he got that scar running down his face?

How do they feel when Sam starts building a large whatever-the-hell-it-is out of blackstone and obsidian? They might catch wind of a prison being built to contain somebody certain. Nobody knows who, but many theories (Tommy, Techno, Tommy, Techno, Tommy–) are discussed. Is the inescapability of the prison boasted about or kept entirely secret? Does anyone look at the massive creation and feel like throwing up on sight? Not only because of the magical effects, but also because how the hell could somebody put a living, breathing human in there and not feel an ounce of regret or remorse? It sticks out like a sore thumb in the badlands and soon people just learn to travel places in a way that they can avoid it at all costs. I wonder if anyone senses Sam’s slight discomfort when he’s talking about who will go inside. Do they pity him? Or do they spit on him and glare at him for agreeing to do this?

The egg is is still only known by Bad, but do you think they sense the changes in his behaviours? Or are they simply too busy with their own lives?

When Tommy shows up, do people think they’re hallucinating? Do they stop in their tracks when they see that not only is he still alive, but he also looks nothing like who he was. He looks tired. So, so tired. His eyes are mostly dull, only the twinkle of the Christmas lights making them seem remotely bright. Though his smile is wide, do they notice how nervous it is? How happy yet unbelievably worried he is? How he slouches more, curls in on himself more, to appear smaller and less threatening. He still speaks loudly, yes, but he shuts up much faster. Do they notice how he always looks over his shoulder? How he always seems hesitant to open his mouth. Do they even recognize who he is anymore?

How do they feel when Tommy lights up when he sees Tubbo, yet seems almost scared to go and talk to him?

When the festival for Dream is announced, do they dread it? Do they get nightmares about the old festival when Tubbo was executed? Do they talk amongst themselves about how bad of an idea it is? Does anyone protest? Or are they just relieved to get some time off? I can’t imagine they’d know about the plans to assassinate Dream.

Are there any passerby’s when Dream stops Techno and Tommy at the Nether portal? Do they exhale in relief when Techno says Tommy is with him? Do they hold their breaths when Techno talks about cashing in a favour? Or do they simply retreat, too scared to be caught in a potential scuffle?

Do they cower or prepare to fight when Tommy and Techno show up, demanding for Techno’s things back? Does anyone really feel any kind of sadness when a Wither is spawned and destroys bits of their homes? Or do they just sigh and pick up the pieces of their hopeless nation?

How many people hear Techno mention blowing up L’Manburg again when he talks with Tommy at the community house? Does anyone catch that information amidst the pouring rain and newly-broken homes? I imagine it’d go unheard. The civilians are too busy fixing yet another damage to follow the mysterious brothers in the pouring rain. (They’d prefer to sleep in dry beds that night, thank you).

The festival takes place and it’s surprisingly... normal. There are tensions between the members of the cabinet and the other important figureheads of their respective lands, but it’s relatively quiet. It’s obviously not a well-planned festival, but it’s a festival nonetheless. Citizens get to enjoy the crappy games and snack booths that were haphazardly put together. It’s unusually peaceful considering this is the DreamSMP. Do they fall to their knees in despair when they find the watery ruins of the Community House? Are they furious that the most significant building in their world has been destroyed, just like everything else important, it seems. How many tears fall that day? How many accusations are spewed that day?

As they watch Tubbo and Tommy yell at each other, are they reminded of the day Tommy was exiled? Do they think of the face-off between best friends that happened on looming obsidian walls and dull skies?

Can they even register the words Tommy screams in blind frustration?

Are they in disbelief when discs are tossed to the enemy?

Or are they even surprised that another fight is breaking out? Do you really think that after all the shit these people witnessed, they’d still get surprised at conflicts.

But what about when Techno and Dream casually discuss plans to blow up their nation beyond repair? Do they finally register what’s happening? Are they frantic, already running to save their stuff? I think some would be in such a state of shock that they can’t even think about leaving.

I think that’d be the moment when people realize just how utterly powerless they are when it comes to their fates.

Is it really worth being sad over anymore?

When Tommy rallies figureheads and civilians alike, they try to be hopeful. To have one last spark of faith. But it’s hard. It’s so hard to be hopeful when the only constant in your life is destruction and chaos of your own home. It’s hard looking into the eyes of a boy so broken by war but still desperately trying to fix things. To know nobody had faith in him, and watch as this kid tries his goddamn best to make things better.

(Is he called selfish? Are people still mad at him? Does anyone have the energy to be mad at him for wanting peace?)

Nobody sees Nikki destroy their items for war.

Many last ‘goodnights’ are said as everyone prepares for what they dread (read: know) will be the end. They wake up to a big obsidian grid towering over their nation and a feeling of hopelessness settles into their guts. It wasn’t supposed to happen this early. It was supposed to be later. They were supposed to have some time in the morning to prepare for the inevitable. To say their final ‘goodbyes’ and hug their families for what could be the last time. They were not supposed to wake up to a grid obscuring the sun, still in progress of being built.

This battle is far more chaotic than the first destruction of L’manburg. There are far more Withers, far more swords and shields clanging, far more shouts between once-brothers and leaders. Phil no longer has the caring yet melancholy smile on his face. His eyes are cold and uncaring, his mouth unmoving as he schools his expression. People drown in blood, but they keep fighting because why not? They don’t have a reason to live anymore. Why not go out fighting for their doomed nation? They look the screeching Withers in the eyes and accept their fate.

Most are too distracted by Withers to listen, but do some hear the desperate cries between a certain Piglin and a certain blond boy? Do their hearts shatter all over again, or can they no longer feel anything? Perhaps their pity is buried underneath all the trauma and exhaustion they’ve endured. It can be hard to pity another when you yourself are barely getting by. They watch Nikki throw a torch into the L’Mantree, uttering the line ‘It was never meant to be’. They watch as it goes up in flames. They do not have the strength to put it out. But some salute with her and give her silent nods of understanding. They can’t bring themselves to be angry when Fundy stands off to the sides and watches their country burn. Do they hear Ghostbur’s outburst agains Phil? Do they watch in sadness as blue tears flow out of his eyes and he cries out about how much he actually feels things and isn’t just some happy-go-lucky comic relief.

Does anyone have enough care left in them to cry?

The numbered survivors join in on singing the national anthem. That seems to be the breaking point for a lot of them.

It’s okay, some try to convince themselves. It was never meant to be.

Not many people stay after that. There are only around 6% of the original population left. A good portion of these people are ones without families or friends. People who can afford to stay in such a destructive environment. It’s a desolate wasteland and people scatter around to find some kind of shelter. They don’t really know why they stay. Why they bother caring. It’s over. Maybe it’s because there’s really nothing left in life for them so what’s the point in leaving if their past will haunt them forever? Or because the chaos of their lives has now become a definite constant and they can’t imagine living without it. They’ve lived with destruction for so long that peace almost seems boring and unfulfilling. Did they really form an addiction to this lifestyle? How pathetic, honestly. Most people join Tubbo in Snowchester while others simply live wherever isn’t completely destroyed.

There are plans of Tubbo and Tommy finally killing dream.

Citizens are tired. It will not end.

The day comes, slow and steady like molasses on a hot day. Silence blankets the already pretty-quiet lands. Unspoken words are muttered between citizens and leaders alike. They line up on the Prime Path and say goodbye to the boys who fought so hard for a better world.

They try not to think about how much the two have lost, and yet they do not give up. Like the soldiers they were forced to be, they march on and face the jaws of death without any second thoughts. There are no fathers or brothers to be proud of them anymore. Nobody to stand behind them and offer unwavering support. They only have each other, and who knows if that’s a good or bad thing.

The silence that hangs over the land doesn’t lift. Not for many, many hours. Not until they watch as Tommy and Tubbo stumble back into the DreamSMP with wounds on their bodies and drained yet ecstatic smiles on their faces.

Nobody talks when they see Sam lead a chained up and tired-looking Dream to the large, inescapable hellhole that is Pandora’s Vault.

Not a word is uttered until the two teenagers announce their victory.

Dream is on his last life.

Dream is in prison.

Dream will no longer hurt them.

There’s an exhale of relief.

Many would argue that this wasn’t worth it. That living in this land was not worth the trouble it brought upon people. And many people would be right. But the sight of Tommy and Tubbo finally relaxing for the first time since before L’Manburg even started made them feel like maybe, just maybe, this moment was worth sticking around for.

46 notes · View notes

linkspooky · 5 years ago

Text

Aizawa and Kurogiri

Edit by @inumaqi

In the latest chapter we see Aizawa’s heartfelt attempts to get through to Kurogiri. To speak to his friend and search for him somewhere inside of the shambling corpse spewing black mist that might be all that remains of him. However as genuine as Aizawa’s feelings, and his pleas are towards Kurogiri they are most likely going to fall on deaf ears. Not because the power of friendship is fake, or no trace of Shirakumo remains inside of Kurogiri, but rather because Aizawa himself cannot accept his friend for who he is now. MORE UNDER THE CUT.

Gran Torino’s attitude towards Kurogiri is indicative of Hero Society as a whole and how Hero Society is never going to be capable of saving anyone in the league of villains as it is now.

It does not matter who they were, or what their circumstances were. Even if they were directly created by the failures of hero society, once they become villains it no longer matters. They are no longer seen as fully three dimmensional people, just enemies to be put down.

Shimura Tenko’s situation is literally the direct failure of both Nana’s poor decision to abandon her child, and Gran Torino and All Might following their word never to look after Kotaro and his descendants, and because of that both Kotaro and Tenko’s entire lives were destroyed by All for One. Yet, despite being directly responsible through negligence for Shimura Tenko literally being kidnapped as a five year old and raised by a villain Gran Torino insists that at the end of the day Shigaraki Tomura is just a crimminal and therefore completely responsible for his own actions.

Those that are blind to the faults of hero society cannot see how people are hurt by hero society. They even speak of Kurogiri like he’s under brain control like they cannot possibly imagine why he would ever turn against hero society of his own free will.

Shigaraki is not an abused child. He’s just an emo punk ass. He’s a problem to society. They don’t view Shigaraki as a person just the danger he represents to other people. Therefore, they cannot possibly conceive of why Kurogiri would have any kind of lingering attachment to Shigaraki.

We as the audience know that the league of villain are all people, who despite being heavily flawed also have their good sides. They are capable of fighting for their friends, and have people they love as well. We’re introduced to two sides of Shigaraki Tomura’s personality. First, we see the violent manchild he is, lashing out at the world around him, volatile, unstable, constantly in pain. Then we meet Shimura Tenko.

Tenko who is this constantly anxious kid, a crybaby who even though he’s literally constantly being punished by his father, stands up to bullies, and still wants to follow his dreams even in a household where everybody is dead against him becoming a hero. We’re introduced to a kid who’s a strong parallel for Deku, someone who cannot stand to see others be left out, because he also knows what it feels like to be alone even in a household surrounded by people and continually reaches out to others even when he himself wants to cry.

Then we realize that Shigaraki is still that person. No matter how warped he became from his childhood self, that’s still the core of who he is. Shigaraki will always take in the outcast, he’ll accept them even when they’re not strictly useful. When twice failed to create a double of the Quirk Bullets, Shigaraki did not throw him out.

The Tenko who will always reach out the outcast even when he himself is in pain, even when he wants to cry is still there. The Tenko that cares so much about other people’s feelings because he knows what it’s like to have his own feelings trampled on.

He is neither Shigaraki Tomura the destructive brat who just wants to hurt others as a form of lashing out. nor Shimura Tenko the one who stands up to bullies and accepts the outsiders for who they are, but rather he’s both at once. He’s both an incredibly violent and emotionally unwell person, and also a kind one who always reaches out to others who are similiarly lost just like him. That’s the form Shigaraki’s victomhood takes, and it’s incredibly complex, ugly and hard to swallow. He’s the monster All for One made him into, and at the core of his being he’s still a victimized child. Neither of these traits cancel out the other, but hero society in its rush to categorize people as hero or victims will never understand the whole of Shigaraki.

Aizawa genuinely cares about Shirakumo, even in his current form of Kurogiri. He still cares for his friend even knowing the sins he must have committed as Kurogiri. However, the bottom line is Aizawa is never going to be able to offer the same understanding that the league has already given to Kurogiri. Aizawa loved his friend for who he was, and for the traces of him that still remain present, but Shigaraki accepts Kurogiri for who he is right now.

Shigarki is the central victim of the manga. He’s connected to the rest of the league. He’s even paralleled heavily to Kurogiri. They were both taken in by All for One at a young age, and both of them have been manipulated by him for a long time and were only saved by him to fulfill a purpose. They’re both ultimately tools to the man who took them in and are loyal to. Shigaraki has even now allowed his body to be tinkered with to the same degree that Kurogiri has in the past. They have both also been by each other’s side the longest, especially if Kurogiri’s sole purpose for being taken in was to raise Shigaraki.

Shigaraki and Kurogiri are also both people who have gone by two different names (Shimura Tenko, Shigaraki Tomura) and (Shirakumo , Kurogiri). They both experienced the ‘death’ of their original selves. They both continued living on even after their own funeral. They are both former aspiring heroes who were turned into villains by All for One’s machinations.

What Aizawa realizes is that both Shigaraki and Kurogiri are the same type of person. They are both people who could never leave a stray alone. They’ve bothspent their entire lives taking care of the outcasts. Those too dangerous to save. Those too problematic to save. Those who saving only brings in more risk and harm for others. They save the people that hero society would otherwise forget.

Aizawa sees this quality in Kurogiri because he knew Kurogiri as Shirakumo, and he recognizes his old friend. However, Aizawa himself would never see this in Shigaraki. Even though Aizawa is a caretaker of children he would never noticed what a damaged and traumatized child Shigaraki is. However, they have essentially both gone through the same thing, Kurogiri and Shigaraki both died and were resurrected by All for One with their original personalities still in tact, if Aizawa cannot accept Shigaraki then he cannot accept Kurogiri as well.

The point that Horikoshi is trying to show us with these people who fell through the cracks, these former aspiring heroes fallen to villainry, is that there is a reason they became villains in the first place. “Fallen” as they are, the children who once wanted to do good and become heroes are still obviously there inside of both of them. Shigaraki and Kurogiri cannot grow up because the world currently as it is would never let them grow up. That’s why Shigaraki wants to destroy it.

Even the way Aizawa talks about Shirakumo’s death, he kind of implies it’s Shirakumo’s own fault for acting too recklessly. Not the fault of say, hero society for putting a teenager on a dangerous internship when the adults should have been handling the more dangerous elements like this.

There’s this insistence on personal responsibility in hero society. That Shigaraki must have wanted to become a villain, therefore it doesn’t matter if he was an abused child taken in by All for One. Aizawa himself while being a very compassionate person is still a part of that society.

Aizawa’s response to Shirakumo’s freak accident of a death was not that perhaps it’s a bad idea to put children into these circumstances into the first place, but rather an emphasis on individual responsibility. If Shirakumo had simply thought things through, if he had been more powerful, then he would have simply avoided the fallen rocks and continued living. Aizawa thinks if he can teach students adequately to be responsible personally for everything and account for those situations that they’ll never be put into harms way.

And there’s absolutely nothing wrong with personal respnsibility, but people like Gran Torino take it too far. Obviously, Shimura Tenko must have wanted to be evil at five years old. If he were a good child he would have somehow resisted fifteen years of manipulation from literally the world’s most powerful evil genius.

But Aizawa knows that his teaching of indvidual responsibility only works up to a point. That people can’t do everything on their own, that they will inevitably need someone who pulls them along, and someone to rely on. People are not saved by punching a villain in the face, people are saved when somebody notices that someone else is in trouble and reaches out to help them regardless of the circumstances. People are saved by people like Shigaraki or Deku who will reah out to help the outcast that cannot help themselves.

Aizawa himself has been damaged by hero society as well. He’s traumatized by the loss of Shirakumo. Which is why he can’t see the inherent flaw that allowed Shirakumo to fall through the cracks in the first place. The attitude that lets children take on full villains, that even now is letting the Hero Commission do shady things like consider all of the students as a backup army in case the heroes were to fall.

The same people that never allowed Hawks to have a life of his own, and instead coerced and raised him to be a hero since he was a child, and then even after taking his whole childhood away by making him be a hero, kept him under their thumbs and made him their expendable spy for the league and made him dirty his own hands. They forced him to be a hero, and then didn’t even allow him to stay the kind of hero who saves others that he wanted to be because they needed him to kill someone to infiltlrate the league. That shows how much the hero regards the ethics of using children.

Aizawa genuinely loves his studets, but he’s also trusting them with these people because he can’t perceive the flaws. He can’t see how Kurogiri is suffering under the system, how Shigaraki is suffering, and how he himself is suffering.

Which is why Aizawa’s pleas will ultimately fail to reach Kurogiri. Yes, he knows his old friend is still there in Kurogiri, but he also completely fails to accept the person Shirakumo has become as Kurogiri. There is already a person who has made a deep connection and brought out the best of Kurogiri as who he already is now, and it’s not Aizawa, it’s Shigaraki. The reason Kurogiri is still kind like Shirakumo was is because he had Shigaraki to care for and bring it out of him by continually treating Kurogiri like a person. What Aizawa wants is to return to the past and become heroes again. Shigaraki will accept Kurogiri as he is now, even as a villain. Aizawa denies who Kurogiri has become, but Shigaraki has already accepted him at his most broken.

That is why the league of villains saves the people who the heroes never could save.

#aizawa shota #shota aizawa #kurogiri #shirakumo oboro #shigaraki tomura #shimura tenko #league of villains #league of villains meta #mha meta #my hero academia meta #my hero academia theory #boku no hero academia meta #boku no hero academia theory

194 notes · View notes

waraupiero · 7 years ago

Text

the same goes for you.

earlier i had made a post about uta’s perspective of his relationship with yomo (more or less), and i thought that with this chapter it’d be nice to say something about yomo’s perspective of his relationship with uta. yes, i do have an obsessive need to bookend everything nicely, but i also think that it’s important to consider both sides of a narrative.

but before that i’m going to elaborate a bit on what uta thinks in chapter 171. just to set the scene and also because i’m really really really really emo about it

uta believes that it’s finished. to him, their friendship has been bookended by a fight. the fight that brings them together; now it’s the fight that’s tearing them apart. for uta, he and yomo are irreconcilable as they are inseparable -- i cannot live with you, nor without you. yomo has chosen to stand and fight for something that is decidedly against what uta is willing to more or less show up for (i doubt he buys much into what furuta is seeking to do), and therefore this fight decides what will happen to their relationship. either uta wins and consumes yomo, and they’ll be together forever, or yomo will win, and he’ll leave uta.

uta counts yomo as someone he could lose. he tells yomo to stand back and not fight loss, because he’s afraid that he’s going to lose yomo if yomo ends up dying, and he goes through great pains to save yomo. he wants to absorb yomo and have him be a part of him, because he doesn’t want to lose their friendship, and he feels like he is going to -- yomo’s stance with goat probably makes uta feel that between their friendship and yomo’s family, yomo is going to choose his family for sure ...

this panel is heartrending. i’ve briefly glossed over this before, but yomo leaving for the twentieth ward not only physically removes him from the fourth ward, but also places him far away in less tangible senses -- he belongs to a different kind of society, his family are now other people ... he’s left his old friends behind. yomo’s permanent residence in the twentieth ward must have felt like he was choosing the twentieth ward over the fourth ward, where uta and itori were ... like he left them to go somewhere faraway.

and of course, this is rather the root of uta’s loneliness and intense insecurity surrounding this friendship. he couldn’t hold onto yomo. he couldn’t protect him. he couldn’t deliver his promise. and when yomo left and changed, uta was left behind and remained the same. the distance just keeps getting farther and farther, and he’s left feeling cold, lonely.

and everything is gone.

‘no.’

yomo’s ‘no’ is an incredible affirmative; because as much as uta wants to wallow in his loneliness, loss, self-pity, and mourning, he’s wrong. he hasn’t lost everything. he still has his friend; he still has yomo.

now’s the time i’m going to beat my fist against my desk and cry, because yomo is truly wonderful and amazing and the best thing to ever happen. anyone who disagrees can meet me in the pit, where i will beat the truth into you with my ‘No. 1 Yomo Renji Fan’ foam finger. uta, after finally being decisively defeated by yomo, decides that he has nothing to lose in confiding all his deepest, saddest emotions to his best friend before he loses him too. but yomo, the man who understands loss perhaps more than he understands some of the people close to him, is able to understand and relate to uta’s circumstance, and tell him that he’s wrong.

yomo knows how it feels to be all alone, with all the people in his life dead or gone, and no one to left to give a shit about him. he knows how it feels to live like a stray, roaming through a city full of mostly hostile strangers. he knows how it feels to have to steal food to stay alive, even from the mouths of other hungry ghouls. they don’t give a damn about him either. or, rather, they do give a damn that he’s eating their food, but they don’t care for him.

until uta comes along with a crazy proposition: hey, mr. raven, who is always trespassing into my home and stealing food from my fridge, insulting my amazing fashion sense, and occasionally beating the shit out of me even though i’d never admit it, do you want to be friends?

the person who yomo’s done nothing but bad things to willingly offered to be his friend. he’s willing to care about him. he’s willing to give a shit. that’s really significant. and what’s better is that it’s not an empty offer. uta takes yomo in, shares his food and resources, respects him as an individual, and is willing to listen to his story, and offer to take on yomo’s own personal revenge, and support him through thick and thin.

uta is such a paradox of a friend. as much as he is selfish and desperate in his friendship with yomo, he’s also been incredibly generous to him. he’s willing to do whatever yomo asks of him -- heck, he’s willing to do whatever yomo needs of him, whether he asks it or not. he’s willing to follow through with his promises to yomo. but at the same time he is self-indulgent in his freedom, and although it’s not personal, his actions to negatively impact people yomo care about. and because of this uta thinks that yomo is going to choose them over him, and finish him.

but you know something interesting about ravens? they never forget a friend. if you help one out, feed it or be nice to it, it will remember you, and it will always come back to you. it will always come back for you.

in a certain way, this conflict has been yomo coming back for uta, and fighting him in order to save him.

he can’t keep both uta and anteiku/:re/goat in his life unless he reconciles the conflict between the two. he has to face uta and where uta stands in order to save everyone in his life. he needs to fight uta and stop him; and so he does. he’s been letting uta do whatever he wants for the past few years, but now yomo’s realised that he has to stand against uta and fight him this time, if he wants to keep him as well.

meanwhile uta is incredibly lost. he doesn’t have anyone to anchor him down, so he teeters along the edges of things, hoping that a switch is going to tip him over, perhaps towards some character development change, and incite some sort of direction in him.

which is in a sense incredibly ??? poetic?? in a hilarious way?? because yomo’s name is written as thus: 四方. ‘four directions’. he’s ... basically a compass? he can give uta a direction. maybe he can even give uta more than one direction. their friendship has always been based on giving each other another chance, helping each other to their feet, and unconditionally supporting one another. there’s many directions they could go in, if they like. it doesn’t end here.

and this is a direction, if uta’ll take it. if the only thing for uta that is worth fighting for, worth putting his full effort into, is eating yomo, then yomo accepts that. he accepts that wholeheartedly, and he allows uta to do it. he’s letting himself be uta’s compass, no matter what it’s going to cost him. because if it’s within his ability he’ll give it to uta. if it’s going to endanger other people, he’ll fight back. either way, uta gets something worth fighting and living for.

in a sense, yomo is repaying uta the favour that uta did him in the fourth ward. back then, even when uta was giving him a solid ass-kicking, he offered to be there for yomo, to feed him, to help him fight for revenge -- which was what yomo had been living for. here, yomo is doing the same thing. he’s coming back to help uta to his feet literally, and to let him achieve his purpose, if that really is his purpose. if not, they’re still friends, and yomo will still be with him.

yomo’s here for him, even after everything that has happened. because yomo renji never leaves a friend. it’s not over yet.

yomo knows that he’s not good with words. it’s hard for him to express his appreciation, his devotion, his affection for the people around him. he feels very self-conscious about this and sees it as a fault. but goddammit if he’s not going to at least be there for them. he sees hope in the people around him, and he wants to hold on to that. he's not a man of grand gestures, long declarations, or elaborate promises. his friendship is manifested in a cup of coffee, a presence in the seat next to you, strong hands to silently support you.

maybe that’s not enough for uta. maybe that’s why all these years he’s felt lonely and cold. yomo does not reach out to other people; and neither does uta. they’ve just stood next to each other, with nothing to say in between them. they know that the other person is right there, but the words don’t come. what is there to say when you don’t know what the other person is feeling? and what is there know if the other person doesn’t say anything?

but now uta has spoken. he’s spoken about all these terrible feelings and thoughts he’s carried over the past ten years. they’ve weighed him down and he fell from the edge.

so yomo listens. yomo listens, and this time yomo reaches out to uta. uta doesn’t say what he needs, because he doesn’t think it matters anymore. to him, none of it should matter to him or to yomo anymore. it was all pointless. and from that yomo understands what uta needs, and he is willing to give it to him. he is willing to give him hope. he shows uta that yes there is loss in the world, but not all is lost; there is still hope out there, and still something to be gained. there is still happiness to be found. if the only hope uta holds onto is eating yomo, if that’s the only thing that will make him truly happy, then he can have that too. because yomo is his friend. it’s okay if uta bothers him, he doesn’t mind. because he’s special to yomo; he’s his friend.

i thought that this was an interesting caption to use here. i’ve thought a bit about what it could mean. i guess for uta, yomo has always been the biggest source of his strength; but also an incredible weakness. he feels pain because he feels so far away from yomo; and loneliness truly is a terrible, painful thing. it’s like a knot that twists within you, pinching you always, leaving you feeling hollow with the echo of its touch. it’s a door that comes knocking but once you open it, there’s no one standing behind it. it’s cold and it drips down your ribs like ice water. it hurts, it hurts a lot, especially when you see that person all the time, and you’re reminded of how far you are, how alone you are.

you cannot live with this kind of loneliness, because it eats you away from the inside; but without this person in your life, you cannot find a reason to live at all.

so at the end, you receive a paradox. this person becomes your greatest weakness, a crippling point that will bring you down to your knees; but this person can also be your greatest strength, a beacon of hope that you can hold onto; a direction to strive for. something worth fighting for. something worth protecting. something worth living for.

difficilis facilis iucundus acerbus es idem; difficult and easy-going, bitter and sweet, you are the same you. i accept that, i welcome that fact; it’s okay. i won’t leave you. because, at the end of the day, you are still the same -- you are my friend, and i am yours.

yomo’s perspective on their friendship is infinitely generous, unconditionally supportive, completely devoted, utterly willing, and even sacrificial. as he’s said before, he finds hope in the connections he has with other people, and what comes out of those connections. he’s not willing to lose any of them, no matter what it’ll cost him. so he’ll stick through and fight for them -- even if it means fighting against them. ‘i swear, this time i will protect you.’

and really, the star card referenced in chapter 170 was the perfect preview for this conversation. the star is letting go of your memories of struggle, your feelings of pain, to find a new potential for happiness. to find a new hope, something to place your faith in. if you add up the digits of the star (1+7), the result is VIII -- the number of the strength card. and is that not what is happening here? a reaffirmation of hope, an offer of a new potential, and a strengthening of friendships and persons.

‘you’ve become strong, renji.’ yes. he is no longer the person that needs to be picked up by other people and supported; he no longer has to search for strong people to follow and learn from. it’s his turn to be the strong person and support the people around him now. it’s his turn to give back to his friends in their time of need. it’s his turn to become their strength.

#ren.txt #yomo renji #renji yomo #uta #tokyo ghoul #tg meta #四方 #ウタ #グール #damn ok here are all my feels i think i should have covered them all #but watch me forget some Big thing and have to come in and add it later #but right now my brain is like 'no you hit all the right points good job ren now go do your homework'#but ok i loVE THEM!!! FUCK THIS CHAPTER KILLED ME IT WAS TOO GOOD #SENSEI!!!! FRIENDSHIP IS INCREDIBLE!!!!! I LOVE FRIENDSHIP!!!!!! THANK YOU!!!!!!!#I'M GOING TO CARRY THIS EMOTION FOREVER IT'S TOO WHOLESOME

315 notes · View notes

fictionchronicler-blog · 8 years ago

Text

Prince Charming: A Historical Romp Through Masculinity, Marriage, and Bad Haircuts

“And then he realized the doll wasn’t completely inflated.”

NOTE: Illustrations and gifs do not belong to me.

Ah, the perfect man, riding gallantly on a white horse, cape billowing in the wind, armor blinding in the sunlight—and he's on his way to find you, gentle reader! This is supposed to be what we want, and I don't just mean women, but I mean general audiences. The handsome prince saving the day is one of the oldest and arguably most satisfying endings there is.

While the term “Prince Charming” itself wasn't coined until 1889 in an English translation of the French fairy tale The Blue Bird, the idea of a noble man rescuing a damsel (usually a princess) from some unholy terror is as old as time, categorized as “princess and dragon tales” by folklorists. Andromeda in Greek mythology has to be saved by Perseus from the kraken. Sita in The Ramayana has to be saved by Rama. In a Norwegian tale, not one but three princesses have to be saved from a troll, the youngest getting the guy in true fairy tale fashion.

This was...a very broad concept, I'll admit, and I almost decided not to do it, but the idea of the ideal man coming along and giving the heroine her happy ending has adapted over time like anything else, and your reliable ol' folklore researcher is here to guide you through it!

As True a Story as Fargo

“I rang the dinner bell fifteen minutes ago. Are you two still fighting?”

The tale of Saint George and the Dragon has been around since at least the eleventh century telling the story of a town needing to feed the nearby lake dragon two sheep a day to keep it from destroying their village—a scaly, supernatural Mafia situation. When that no longer appeases the dragon, the village assumes this means it wants the taste of human flesh and starts a lottery, the “winner” getting to sacrifice one of their children. Well, one day, the lottery winner is the princess. Dressed as a bride, she is led out into the forest to wait for the dragon.

In the first version I read of this, the princess volunteered to sacrifice herself for the good of her people, but I digress. We'll talk about women's agency here and there. Saint George comes across the princess and subsequently the dragon. Ordering the princess to give him her girdle, she does so and Saint George places it around the beast's neck. From here on out, the dragon follows the princess around like a dog on a leash. Saint George takes his new, unique entourage back to the village and offers to kill the dragon if the townspeople convert to Christianity. Fifteen thousand men convert. Take that, modern evangelism.

While Saint George and the Dragon is largely allegory, it falls in perfectly with the big medieval trend of courtly love. In a nutshell, courtly love is a way to make love both passionate and disciplined. Romantic love hadn't really been covered in literature up until now, Beowulf not really having to deal with having to juggle two prom dates.

It's hard to explain what courtly love is without saying “emo.” Think of love the way a teenager might see it. Not seething with jealously? It's not love. Your feelings aren't ruining your appetite? Not love. This was more or less a series of rules and concepts that dictated how romantic love was supposed to be. A man's good character makes him worthy of love. You should turn pale when your lover is around. Women should grieve for at least two years before allowing themselves to love again. It is not proper to love a woman you would be ashamed to marry, etc. Perhaps the most noteworthy thing about courtly love is that there isn't that big an emphasis on love being returned. When a man falls for a woman, he should do nice things for her and just hope that one day she'll love him, too. Unrequited love was pretty romanticized. You can get a really nice feel for it in The Cantebury Tales' “The Knight's Tale.”

No. That’s something else. “The Knight's Tale” is much more long-winded and has no Queen songs. That, and it's one of the least funny tales. Thank goodness for the Miller and his story that involves farting in people's faces. Anyway, the tale is all about two imprisoned knights who fall in love with Princess Emily at first sight and spend the rest of the time fighting over her and praying to Roman gods to marry her...while she prays to Diana to either stay single or marry someone who truly loves her. It's not as fun as other tales, mainly because the Knight has a tendency to get off-topic, but if you want textbook courtly love, read that.

So what do these stories tell us about people's version of the ideal man in the Middle Ages?

1. Competent. A real man gets things done.

2. Decisive. A real man does not stew on the morality of killing dragons.

3. Protective. Sombody’s gotta look out for these women who are inferior to men in every way, amirite?

4. Upper Class. Peasant men might not have had much time to rescue damsels. And the Peasants Respond!

Just a tad predatory looking. All he needs to do is sit on her chest while a random horse watches...

While fiction in the Middle Ages really enjoyed its daring sword fights and unrequited love, peasants in the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries told tales to children with a far different purpose—don't go into the woods. For the love of God, don't go into the woods, don't make deals with the devil, and don't run afoul of the fairy folk. This might seem funny, but for peasants living in or around the Black Forest of Germany, this was no laughing matter. Think how many fairy tales are more about being suspicious of suspicious-looking people than romantic love. Keep in mind, too, that there is little to no chance of upward mobility in this kind of society. If you're a peasant, your kids are going to be peasants, marry peasants, and produce little peasants of their own. It's even worse if you're a farmer and your family's prosperity depends wholly on how well your crops do. How can you get ahead in life?

1. Go off the grid and become a pirate/bandit/thief

2. Learn alchemy and hope for the best

3. Join the church and live in a cubicle for the rest of your life

4. Marry up.

The stories collected by the Brothers Grimm took royalty and made it the ultimate reward. In most of their stories, if the protagonist (male or female) is clever enough to outsmart the villain and/or kind enough to listen to cleverer people who know how to outsmart the villain, they are usually rewarded with a prince or a princess at the end. There really isn't much disparity in how often the reward is a princes vs. a princess.

I won't go into much detail in what all these stories are about, but if you haven't ever heard of “The Three Spinners,” “Cinderella,” “The Six Swans,” “Snow White,” “Snow White and Rose Red,” or “The Peasant's Wise Daughter,” you might be surprised to learn that the protagonist(s) is a plucky, kind-hearted, usually skilled maiden and her reward is a prince. For all the crap fairy tales get for being chauvinistic, it's jarring that the most memorable characters are all female.

So jarring, Charles Perrault decided to make a few changes.

In the late 1600s, fairy tales started becoming appealing to the rich, and like all good things the poor come up with, the rich people took it over and added a bunch of rules. Many upper class French men and women had heard these peasant tales and saw them as potential for witty conversation in the salons. I like me some stimulating conversation, but I also know when not to mess with the original. With courtly love also coming back into vogue, the stories evolved into elegant, romantic tales with a heavily-hammered-in moral at the end. Less blood and fewer trees. The forest became a more pastoral setting, or even a city. The peasant protagonists became gentry or displaced royalty. And marriage became a big, big deal.

When in the Middle Ages, the prince figure was usually a knight a man of action, these were unquestionably princes, their refinement and sophistication as highly valued as their masculinity. Beauty and the Beast started as sort of a fable for arranged marriages, that the guy you end up with may not fit your definition of handsome, but if you look deep enough, you'll find something lovable.

“Forgot my keys--oh.”

Okay, so you might not find something lovable, but the Beast is no less an extremely romantic (read: emo) character. He asks Beauty every night to marry him, gives her his estate and possessions and invisible servants with no questions asked, and literally cannot live without her as he begins wasting away when she leaves to visit her family. And of course, he's a prince that pissed off the wrong fairy.

It is in this same era that Perrault tweaked the Cinderella story. The Grimms told a story of Cinderella's dead mother supplying her a gown and other ball-related necessities via tree, but Perrault creates a “fairy godmother” who pops in at the last minute to help Cinderella go to the ball—a place where she might be able to catch a husband and escape her bad home life—but never appeared before to use her benevolent magic to stop the girl's stepmother and stepsisters from abusing her. Perrault also cut out the stepsisters cutting off parts of their feet to try to fit into the slipper, preferring to have Cinderella turn the other cheek and find desirable husbands for them instead.

We're going from the clever, talented heroines in the Grimm stories to waifs who are damned if they do, damned if they don't. If you're pure and sheltered like Sleeping Beauty, you'll still fall into a hundred-year coma. And if you're naughty...well, this time a woodcutter has to come cut Red Riding Hood out of the Wolf's stomach...then fill said stomach with stones. This kind of undoes Perrault's moral about not trusting strangers since this woodcutter never appears in the story at any other time, but we can't have a morally susceptible female rescuing herself, can we? Even Bluebeard downplays the heroine's character to uplift the prince's/nobleman's. Bluebeard's a freakin' serial killer and yet Perrault's text blames the wife for the situation, that if she just had refrained from being too curious, her husband wouldn't be trying to kill her for finding out about all his previous wives.

“Princes went from chivalrous to serial killers?”

Not quite, but the heroines were rarely given personalities and the princes were the rescuers, the real movers and shakers in the story. Princes went on adventures and rescued future brides. In 1706, the first English translation of One Thousand and One Nights told the West the story of Prince Ahmed, who a nifty magic tent that could expand to the point where it could hold armies and contract to the point where he could put it in his pocket. He also happens to buy a magic healing apple and saves a princess with it. There are a number of strong, three-dimensional female characters, but the princes all get to be active and go on adventures. There is also a robot. I'm not joking. But a huge double standard is that women are foolish and selfish and cheating on their husbands with a Moor is the worst thing ever, but the men in the story (princes included) sleep around, hit women, and even Sinbad murders a bunch of innocent people for food, but the male characters are rarely punished in these stories. The whole fictional reasons these stories exist also lauds men; the Sultan is worried about being cheated on, so he kills every wife he has. Scheherazade, the newest wife, is creative and clever and tells stories that always leave the Sultan wanting more, so he spares her life, choosing to keep her after a thousand and one nights. The Sultan lives happily ever after, madly in love with an intended murder victim.

So let’s see how things have changed?

1. Competent? Check.

2. Decisive? Check.

3. Upper Class? More check than ever.

4. Protective?

Protection adapted, didn't it? Protection stopped being more about keeping women away from beasts and more about providing for women. The men in these stories are not only filthy rich—which is its own kind of protection—but they are also morally guiding these women and keeping them alive. Bluebeard's wife is rescued by her brothers at the end, but Perrault says the moral of the story is that curiosity can lead to deep regret. He then goes on to talk about how “clearly” this story takes place a long time ago as, “No husband would be so terrible as to demand the impossible of his wife.” How the hell is that the issue when the man's a serial killer??? What does curiosity have to do with the very first wife???

We're going to throw in another value here. Wise.

Think about it. Cinderella's prince immediately seeks her out, seeing her as no one has seen her before, as appealing. The “Marquis” in Puss in Boots is in reality a simple miller's son, but the Cat is so worldly and clever that he more than makes up for it. The woodcutter is a fatherly figure who heard Red Riding Hood's cries for help and knew exactly what to do and took her home to her mother. Even Bluebeard, who sets his wives up for failure and has a room full of tortured corpses is entitled to test his wife and keep this horrendous secret, his only crime being that he “asked the impossible of his wife,” which translates to, “asked his wife not to be too curious about her own home, lest she find the room of tortured corpses.”

Yin and Yang

Hamlet: I said I wanted the grave to be dug under a weeping willow tree on the edge of a cliff perpetually surrounded by mist! How hard is that?

Gravedigger: But this is where the cemetery is, sir.

Hamlet: (to skull) Can you believe this guy?

Hamlet, first performed in 1605 is not anything all that special, but so many tote it as Shakespeare's masterpiece. My theory is that that is all propaganda on the part of actors. Getting to play Hamlet is like being written a blank check—the actor can do with the role whatever he wants because it is sooooo ambiguous! You don't even know how old Hamlet's supposed to be, as he's a student in medieval Denmark, which would put him in his late teens, but the gravedigger says Hamlet's 30. Hamlet seems slightly more upset about his mother remarrying than having learned his father was murdered, but he also goes berserk a few times at people who aren't involved in his father's murder at all, and while Claudius, the villain, murders one person (in back story) and angsts about it for the rest of the play, Hamlet himself gets quite the body count and shows little to no remorse about it.

Does the fact that Hamlet is a prince have to do with this role often being the peak of an actor's career? Why do we think an actor who can play Hamlet well can do anything? Hamlet's not really enough of a jerk that it's Villain Sympathy. In fact, Hamlet is one of the least proactive protagonists in literature. The majority of the play is him wondering what he should do. Should he listen to this ghost that claims to be his father? Should he tell any of his friends what's going on? Should he kill Claudius when he finds out that, yes, the guy did kill his dad? Should he leave his mom out of it, or was she involved? To be or not to be?

But to the mainstream, Hamlet is the guy who holds the skull and waxes poetic while sword fighting in period dress. Somehow, him just sitting on this supernatural order to avenge his father's death has been twisted to where we've decided it's the role of a lifetime. Shakespeare wrote other characters who were princes, but none of them were as prominent or as over-analyzed as Hamlet.

Does Hamlet have any good qualities? Well, of course, or the play would have been a complete flop. He's magnetic. He's smart, snarky, and unsure of himself. But then you have Ophelia, his love interest. Whereas Hamlet is defined by his struggle to be decisive, Ophelia just lets her father and brother make decisions for her. She is dutiful, she has no idea that Hamlet is pretending to be crazy for some of the play (or maybe he is crazy. So much ambiguity), and when her brother leaves, Hamlet seemingly rejects her from out of nowhere, her father is killed and her lover banished, she goes off the deep end.

Therefore, it seemed like what was going on is that women were losing more and more of their credibility while royal men could afford the luxuries of indecision here and there so long as they still fit all the other criteria.

Hammer It Further In, Victorians!

The Victorians might just be my favorite historical group of people. They're a psychological delight. Not that they were as repressed as pop culture makes them out to be, but they were all about restraint when it came to deviant behaviors and ideas, often disguising them. In the Victorian era, the hero stopped being the centerpiece of the story. Most of the care, detail, and time went into the villain. Dracula, Sweeney Todd, Spring Heeled Jack, Frankenstein, Dorian Grey, Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde and just about the rest of the cast of Penny Dreadful were the ones driving the plot of their respective stories, the ones the authors paid the most attention to. Often, they were pitted against an innocent heroine, like Christine in The Phantom of the Opera and Mina in Dracula, but there was an edge to them. Both Christine and Mina might surprise readers in how deadpan and genre-savvy both these women are, and while they don't physically vanquish their beasts, they play key roles.

So where does this leave the prince?

The role of the home in the Victorian era became more significant than ever before. A man's home was his castle. His job was to make it a safe haven; his family's job was to make it a domestic ideal. Again, the ideal man was a protector, someone who could keep his wife and children safe from beasts (poor people, people who didn't speak English, Irishmen, etc.), but also protect them morally. It's kind of easy to be seduced by the list of villains I put on here, isn't it? They're just as rich as princes, sometimes handsome, often decisive and passionate...and maybe therein lies the problem. The ideal man was not yet passionately in love with the heroine.

“What do you call all that courtly love business?”

Isn't that more in love with the idea of being in love? Honestly, you pick a random woman, say you'll do great things for her whether she loves you or not, but at the end of the day, you're the one getting the credit for doing those brave deeds and she'll be seen as ungrateful because you've never even had a conversation with her to tell her how you feel. Loving a woman in the sense that you physically desire her while still desiring her friendship wasn't happening yet. In a society that didn't encourage women to be open about their own passions, the men also weren't really allowed to do much that wouldn't result in a scandal. He was supposed to treat his wife more like an employee than the object of his affection. He could praise her skills at mothering and running a household, and maybe she could play a mean tune on the pianoforte, but none of her skills were supposed to be superior to his own. The princes and heroes of the Victorian age were as bland as all get-out because everybody wanted to live vicariously through the more passionate villains.

Well, film changed how we view the devil. Did it change how we view Prince Charming?

Who Would Have Thought Melodrama was Boring?

Now, to be fair, not all these guys are princes, but I would be remiss if I was going to talk about princes in film and omit Disney's contribution. For a long time, Disney animators had difficulty animating human men, and it shows. Remember that short, Goddess of Spring? Even though her arms are boneless, she looks like a passable female human. The god of the Underworld, though? It looks like an old-time Mardi Gras mask.

Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs premiered in 1937, the same year that the Prince Valiant comic strip did, and both princes are given next to no personalities. Snow White's prince doesn't even get a name! Please stop saying Snow White is objectified when it's her prince that is treated as nothing more than a goal and subsequently a reward.

“But his heroism is just supposed to be accepted because he's a man and he's royal!”

Is it? Disney animators tried to work around the lack of princely influence in the Grimm version by writing a subplot about the Evil Queen capturing the Prince and him escaping...but animating a realistic-looking man was just too hard for them. We don't care about him or look at him like a person. He's Snow White's reward. Nothing more.

Cinderella's prince, officially the “Prince Charming” of Disney canon, is also objectified. He has maybe three lines? He isn't even there when Cinderella puts on the slipper? His dad is given more screen time than him?

Notice that, in keeping with the Victorian melodramas and silent movie traditions, the movies that have the most boring princes have very engaging, very passionate villains. The Evil Queen, the Wicked Stepmother, and Maleficent in Sleeping Beauty are given richer animation, more distinctive voice actors, and a deliciously evil charm, that, so far, the princes just can't top. They remained fairly quiet with their heroism just a given. Around this same time, Laurence Olivier won an Oscar for 1948's Hamlet, the only time an Oscar was given to someone playing a Shakespearean character. So it seemed like the prince was still relatively unexplored. “He's a prince! Must be a great guy.”

Not all princes in early Hollywood were bland, but there was a kind of leading man that got a lot more action, both in the cinematic and romantic sense—the rogue.

In the 30s and 40s, it was more common for the hero of a movie to be anything but a prince. He was a hard-boiled private detective, a thief (usually of the Robin Hood variety), or a pirate, as swashbuckling dramas were big back then. Princes, therefore, started becoming a little buffoonish. The ideal man in the 50s was, oddly, the family man. The prince had changed to the ruler of a suburban home, still retaining all the traits we've mentioned before, only Ward Cleaver (Leave it to Beaver), Steve Douglas (My Three Sons), Ozzie Nelson (The Adventures of Ozzie and Harriet), and Andy Taylor (The Andy Griffith Show) all upheld values most of Middle America agreed with and added a truly positive item to our list:

1. Competent

2. Decisive

3. Upper Class-ish (rise of the middle class!)

4. Wise

5. They Want to be Dads

Parody Ensues

The 60s changed a lot of things, how princes are portrayed among them. While the Prince Valiant comic strip was still going strong, people began wondering if this Prince Charming ideal was really a positive thing. Wasn't the upper-to-middle class white guy the enemy of the Civil Rights Movement? Wasn't the patriarchal figurehead oppressing and dismissing women? Were these guys—gasp--just like everyone else in that they're fallible and sometimes do stupid or misguided things? Jeez, these Prince Charmings (Princes Charming?) must all be doofuses when you peel back the veneer. Isn't that how princes are in real life?

When Royalty Smiles...

In 1973, Jay Williams wrote the children's book Petronella, and it fit right in with the Women's Movement. Eager to seek her fortune, Petronella sets out into the world like her brothers and learns about a prince held captive by a wizard named Albion. Albion says she must prove herself by completing certain fairytale-esque tasks, she does so through kindness and wit, and—spoiler alert—she and Albion fall in love. Turns out, the prince is just a house guest that won't leave. I can't find the cover art for the back of the book, but the prince looks like a Monty Python character.

In this same year, there was another book out there with a prince who was deceptively appealing. William Goldman wrote The Princess Bride and later adapted it for the screen in 1987. The only person who starts out as royalty in the book is Prince Humperdinck, and that name alone should tell you this isn't someone to take seriously. Sure, he's competent, noted in the film for being an excellent tracker, and he's quite the mastermind, but he's also the villain! The whole reason he plans to marry Buttercup is so he can kill her on their wedding night and frame another kingdom for it so he can get a war! Buttercup's True Love is actually a former farm boy named Westley who is doing a stint as the Dread Pirate Roberts. Humperdinck doesn't stand a chance.

I do like Chris Sarandon's performance. He brings such dignity to it, which actually makes it more fun.

As if pop culture wasn't dropping the anvil fast enough that Prince Charmings weren't all they were cracked up to be, Stephen's Sondheim's Into the Woods gave us Cinderella's Prince and Rapunzel's Prince, and the line, “I was raised to be charming, not sincere,” says it all. Who would have thought a musical about interconnecting fairy tales would have so much innuendo (it's pretty uncomfortable seeing certain parts of this with children, let me tell you), adultery, psychological abuse, and character deaths? It was finally filmed in 2014 and satirizes these angst-ridden overly-masculine types with the song “Agony:”

We're going to talk about one more before we get an interesting counterpoint to all this parody. Ladies and gentlemen, Prince Charming from the Shrek universe:

Forget the fact he looks like Jaime from Game of Thrones. Rupert Everett's Prince Charming is a spoiled, prissy snob whose mother is none other than the Fairy Godmother, the brains behind the operation. Seriously, the movie where Prince Charming takes the lead as the Big Bad is terrible. There isn't much to say about the role even though it's entertaining except that it just goes to the other extreme. Prince Charming is decisive about not letting an ogre be with the woman that was promised to him, and he does seem competent at horseback riding and doing the tango, but he's whiny, preens a little too much for traditional manly men, and, most importantly, is okay with forcing Fiona to be with her against her will.

“But, but, but, if the Prince Charming archetype is just an illusion, what kind of man can we have faith in?”

Well, I would say the rogue as in most movies, he proves to be a hero underneath the snark and scruff, but that's another meta (see The Unscrupulous Hero meta). This brings up a good point—at least these parodies of princes are characters. They have personalities and arcs. You can call them a lot of things but you can't call them bland. Prince Charming up until now has been a construct, a goal, a reward. Everything but a real person.

Evolution!

Bringing it back to the Disney princes, 1989 responded to all these unworthy princes with Prince Eric in The Little Mermaid. I consider him the prototype prince since he is substantially given more to do and emote than the previous princes ever were, but he's still kind of vanilla. Eric likes being out on a ship, longing for a life at sea while Ariel longs for a life on land. Hmm. He plays the flute, totally doesn't mind doing the messier tasks a crewman on a ship would do, and the film goes out of its way to show that he is brave and not one to be messed with. He saves his dog from a fire and harpoons a giant octopus woman. He hangs out with Ariel, has fun when she’s around, and this was one of the first Disney movies that introduced some chemistry between the human leads.

After Eric came the Beast, Aladdin, and Simba, and while Aladdin is by far the most fleshed-out of these characters, these prince figures were given something Eric didn't have—pain. Disney's Beast isn't proposing to Belle every night like in the original fairy tale. We don't meet him as a romantic lead, but as a broken chimera despairing that his entire life seems to be defined by one bad choice. Simba may not be the most interesting character, but there is a moment in the movie where he starts yelling at the sky (read: his dead father) about Mufasa not being there for him and then just breaks down in tears and cries, “It's my fault.” Good lord, you feel for him there as much as you do when he's a little cub shaking his dead father in hopes of awakening him.

Prince Naveen in The Princess and the Frog is not your grandmother's prince. It's almost a full-out comedic role as Naveen is...kind of a bum. He's a prince, but he's lazy, so his parents have cut him off, leaving him to either get a job and work for a living, or marry a rich woman. Ha ha, Naveen just wants to play the ukelele, enjoy New Orleans' night life, and pick the richest of his many admirers to marry. After he falls for Tiana, he doesn't change all that much. He is willing to work for something and can buckle down, but he's still that funny, enthusiastic guy you want to be friends with. He isn't diminished in his relationship with her. Nor is she. Naveen can get Tiana to loosen up, and while the plot of The Princess and the Frog is needlessly complex here and there, the romance is very strong and their banter is right up there with all the great movie romance banter.

D’awww!

Counterpoint to a Counterpoint

Oh, Prince Hans of the Southern Isles, I'm onto you, what with your romantic-comedy shtick. To this day I am torn as to whether or not the twist to make him the villain was a good one or not. On the one hand, it gives his character a reason for being in the story, and it's a realistic lesson that trusting everyone is just as bad as trusting no one. However, what's the goofy little smile at the end of the clip all about? Does he genuinely like Anna but still plans to somehow take over the throne? Is that just how he smiles when he tweaks his own schemes? His original plan was just to marry Elsa, but now it seems like, “Well, I can marry the cute, funny girl instead and just kill the aloof one. Win-win.”

“Psychopaths don't wear t-shirts saying 'You're with Psychopath' on them.”

Very true, and a commonality many psychopaths share in real life is that they are, you guessed it, charming. They know how to attract people to them. Unfortunately, though, things like empathizing with those people and putting those people before themselves are not really feasible things for a psychopath to do. But then again, we are talking about film here, not real life, so is it a cheat that they made him the villain seemingly out of nowhere? Weren't we supposed to be given some hints about his true nature since this is a story?

If you ask Disney, they did disperse clues here and there that Hans was not what he seemed. He wears gloves, for example. Did you know gloves are a visual shorthand for villain? Never mind that most of Hans' screentime is either at a ball in which gloves would have been fashionably appropriate or when it's, you know, cold outside. Another thing they refer fans to is that in the song “Love is an Open Door,” Hans' lines about “finding his own place” and agreeing that Anna's “sandwiches” response to his “We finish each other's ____” was what he was going to say are indicative that he's stringing her along. Okaaaayyyy.

“But if you were taken in, isn't that the point? Nobody knowingly gets involved with a psychopath.”

Yeah, but this is all so vague. Consider that while Elsa is the queen and Anna is the princess, they are way too busy dealing with their own problems to actually rule Arendelle or do anything to help all the innocent people suddenly plagued by an unexpected winter.

Look at this! Doesn't this just muddle things more? Hans is the one handing out blankets and inviting the subjects to the castle where he makes it a point to say it's warm there and they've got plenty of hot food for everyone. We're making the villain the only character in the entire thing who does any damage relief? I'm sure this is probably a “catch more flies with honey than vinegar thing” as the truly logical person would conclude that Hans is just trying to win over the peasants so they don't revolt when he takes things over, and I know that being homicidal doesn't necessarily preclude anyone from being a great ruler, but come on!

I guess the point the movie is trying to make with Hans is that you can meet a guy who seems great on paper and fits all the items on the checklist we've been keeping track of, but he can still turn out to be a jerk. And I will say that Disney has tried the “surprise villain reveal” thing in a few of its other movies that came out after this, but this one handled that the best.

The New Wave

I can't say 2015's Cinderella is better than the 1950 version, but one thing it did that I admire was that it made Prince Charming a person. Prince Kit (I would have named him something else, but I digress) has his doubts that he can be as good a king as his father. Richard Madden gets to actually act as he not only has to be a little restless in his role, but also gets to express grief. He had said that the challenge of playing the Prince is to make sure that Cinderella is not seen as being lucky to get a prince, but that this prince is lucky to have found her.

We have an earlier example of this with 1998's Ever After. Prince Henry (Dougray Scott) is a very reluctant prince and shirks his duties whenever he can. It is Danielle (Drew Barrymore) who changes his way of thinking in that he can do so much good with the power that he has, and it is his obligation to do so. He listens to her, respects her, it's clear that he also physically wants her, and the two get plenty of time to get to know one another. His reaction when the princess he's betrothed to starts wailing is priceless because it's so in-character and there's even Leonardo DaVinci thrown in the movie for fun...a very charming movie indeed.

Artie Hammer is also a good prince, Prince Alcott in Mirror, Mirror. About the only good thing in that, actually. I didn't feel it was dark enough to be a Snow White story, but Snow White and the Huntsman didn't have enough joy to be a Snow White story (or enough actual dwarves playing the parts). Again, the Prince gets to be funny, gets to be a bit political as his whole reason for going to this kingdom in the first place is to meet with the Queen (Julia Roberts being horribly miscast). I don't appreciate the amount of ogling this otherwise children's movie does to the poor actor, but for the most part, he's a character in his own right. Maybe soon he'll pick some better projects that don't have him upstaged by a guy pretending to be a Native American like in The Lone Ranger.

But my all-time favorite Prince Charming has to go to Josh Dallas' David “Charming” Nolan on Once Upon a Time.

“Attention, everyone! I know magical shenanigans are ruining all your lives, but you have to be in the background while the show focuses on my family's drama! For goodness sake, pull yourselves together and be the comic relief!”

Charming is pretty much everything we've covered so far, and you can see the historical detail they put into developing his character. This prince started life as a shepherd, a commoner who, by some magical deals that don't merit this meta, must pose as a prince. He gets to be one for real after he marries Snow White, but the crafted him to be a farmer-type guy. He drives a pickup truck. He wears a lot of flannel. He's sometimes old-fashioned with his flaws as he can be overly protective and quick to judge, but he's also quick to change his opinion when he's proven wrong.

Charming is deceptively easy to understand, and I don't mean that he's an airhead or a parody of what he represents. I mean that his goals in life are simple. His likes, his morals—they're all simple, even his fears. The man's greatest fear is that he isn't a good dad. That's so relatable since every parent has wondered that about themselves, but it's fresh and unique when it's applied to Prince Charming, a “character” far more defined by offscreen heroics than being a member of a family. In the very first episode, he's taking on three swordsmen while holding his infant daughter. That's the character in a nutshell.

It's a role that's a little underwritten, but like Hamlet, that sometimes means you can do some amazing things with it. OUAT is full of polarizing characters, but Charming is not one of them. He's universally loved, and that has everything to do with how convincingly Josh Dallas plays him, especially that he is able to play a father to an actress technically older than him playing his daughter.

Even when he doesn't have much to say, Josh Dallas brings so many fatherly gestures and facial expressions to the part. That might be why the show has given him more and more to do as it's gone on. It's a new take on the Prince Charming construct, isn't it—that all the sword-fighting, arrow-shooting, horseback riding, face-punching, and villain-confronting this guy does is for his family?

His relationship with Snow on this show is sort of the measuring stick to which all other romantic relationships are compared to, and I wouldn't even say “Snowing” is the main romance. While Snow gives Charming some much-needed direction, he gives her confidence. There are so many moments when Snow is doubting herself that Charming is the one to build her back up. His belief that his wife can do anything is the foundation of True Love, and I don't mean that he sees her through rose-tinted glasses. They are partners. One gets the sense that they rule together, whether it be in the flashbacks in the Enchanted Forest, or how they handle the town's problems in the present.

So I would say our checklist is looking more like this:

1. Is a complex human being with positive (competent, decisive, wise, willing to parent) and some flaws to stay interesting

2. Has respect and admiration for his love and their relationship has a healthy dose of friendship in it

But if I were to just list all of Charming's traits—good and bad—or anything other well-written character in any medium—the list might just go on and on. It's that way with real-life personalities, and opinions will vary on what the ideal man or woman is like. Prince Charming is no longer an archetype or a plot point but a person, a real person who is inspired to do his best for love at the same time he inspires the person he loves to do their best. Life is hard, and it's hard to find someone to share it with, but the fact that fiction is emphasizing these aspects is so positive.

#meta; once upon a time; disney; fairy tale; film; books

1 note · View note