#hence why s6 is a disaster

[anthony-kate]

Lucifer is pretty much my fave show.

Yes, I hate the end/last season.

We exist.

[jacquesthepigeon]

Two bits: I think dropping S5 while peeking at S6 to see if there has been a change post Agreste Arc (There might not be, but its worth a look) might not be a bad idea. I know I'm following but haven't actually *watched* several of the later episodes, I don't need to give them that much time 🤣

Then on the 'ugh S5' side I realized one more casualty of that disaster that is Derision.

I'd always held out that Marinette's disaster at the end of Queen Wasp (reuniting Chloe and Audrey) was well intentioned and simply came from a place of ignorance. She simply couldn't fathom a world in which being with a mother *wasn't* what was best for a child.

Yet after Derision one has to wonder, was it simply a form of vengeance, conscious or no?

I haven’t seen Derision but I think it’s a combination of the fact that Marinette is fairly ignorant when it comes to strained family relationships and the fact the crew seems to think any relationship is better than no relationship hence why Chloé and Audrey’s “bonding” is framed as a positive and a lot of other bad parents in the series are framed sympathetically

[clawcommanderabsinthe]

Idk if you still want questions,if not I'm sorry,but may I ask why you love Jasper that much? ((Yeah I just wanna give you a reason to talk about her tbh but also same, she is way to beautiful help me...*cough* sorry))

1: I kinda answered this before but hell I'll gladly do it again

2: Why should I help you? Loving Jasper is nothing we should heal. Give in to it!

Okay. Let's get started.

Lets get it out of the way:

SHE'S ABSOLUTELY GORGEOUS. THAT PREMIUM ORANGE BEEF IS SOMETHING TO DIE FOR. AND THAT VOLUMINOUS HAIR. MMMMHHH GOOOOOD.

Okay. Now to the next things

I feel bad for her. She basically was a child soldier in the past and everyone expected her to be perfect. I feel bad for her

Then there was the Malachite disaster. Which was entirely Lapiss fault btw. But everyone blames it on Jasper. Jasper was the abused one yet everyone says she's the abuser. I have been in a very similar situation to Jasper hence why I relate to her a lot.

That is also the reason why I am so militant in my pursuit to fucking CRUSH the Lapiss stans and Jaspis bootlickers. I have nothing but disgust for them.

People who excuse and romanticise Abuse are just simply Scum in my eyes.

Even if Lapis would grow and redeem herself those two should never be together. Abuser shouldn't get a second chance with their victims.

But I get off Topic.

So. Another reason why I love Jasper is that she wrecks Garnet and the others so fucking fast it's unholy. Garnet never lost up to that point and Jasper just fucking annihilated her. Bam. Done.

And finally we come to the big heavy topic.

The Absence of Jasper.

What can I say that I didn't before.

I want her back asap. But at this point I gave up that she'll get a satisfying Arc. Probably she will even be described as the Abuser in S6 because Rebecca is one of those fucking Bootlickers as well.

@lacetfavilla Yo you got anything to add?

Hope this answers your questions anon!

[pregstiel]

no one asked however i'm not getting an english degree to not put my knowledge to good use (spnblr).

anyways! brief summary of the relevant information about a doll's house. it's a 19th century play about a married couple: torvald and nora. their relationship is as deeply weird as most relationships were at the time, with their dynamic predicated upon the idea that nora is a weak pretty thing that exists only to entertain torvald, while torvald is the strong protector who takes care of everything. over the course of the play however, it's revealed that this a facade. nora does genuinely believe in torvald's performance for the most part, but many years ago when he was deathly ill, forged a signature to borrow money to pay for his treatment, and has spent the years afterwards secretly paying off this loan, using a combination of the money she makes through discreetly working and through being thrifty spending anything torvald gives her. disaster comes for nora only when the man she borrowed money from, who torvald despises, threatens to reveal to torvald what she did. nora is nearly driven to suicide believing that torvald, if her crime was revealed, would take the blame for it. when torvald learns what she did, however, he instead declares nora to be evil and wants her to take all the blame for her crime, reversing his position only when he learns that the blackmailer is no longer interested in exposing them. this glimpse of who torvald really is, along with the horror of her situation fully impressing itself on nora, leads to her instead deciding to leave torvald rather than stay and remain his doll (hence the play's name).

to put it another way, both stories are about someone who takes drastic (and perhaps morally questionable) action in order to keep someone they're in love with safe, while carefully cultivating an image designed to please said loved one. both do this by striking deals with a person their loved one has associated with and worked with before, but who they now hate, and furthermore, are willing to condemn the person taking action for associating with them at all.

when the truth comes out, rather than the loved one throwing themselves on the sword, as the person who did the action fears (cas literally started dealing with crowley to keep dean away from an angelic war he was sure dean would involve himself in if cas asked), he instead lashes out at the person who did the act, claiming it was unnecessary and has forever tarnished their view of the other person, despite there having been no real feasible alternatives to what happened.

however! where a doll's house roundly condemns torvald for his actions, both for how he lashes out at nora and for how he has treated her throughout their relationship, s6 very bravely asks: what if torvald was right? what if what nora did was super bad, and she totally should have consulted him first? and what if when nora leaves torvald, it's because she's gone crazy and is hurting people, and it's actually better if she stays with and submits to him? and furthermore, what if nora leaving the control of both torvald and the control (by extension) of her family doesn't lead to her discovering who she is? what if instead, the experience leads to her first developing literal amnesia (which must be cured) and then psychologically scarring her (which also must be cured) (both by torvald) (who she has to beg forgiveness from)?

and, as this has been spoken on a lot by others i'll be brief, though it bears repeating, s6 is also told almost entirely from dean's point of view!!! where a doll's house focuses on nora, and lets the audience/reader marinate in her despair and anxiety, exploring her relationship, how she came to the point of making her deal, and how both are affecting her, s6 is instead a version of that play where the focus is entirely on torvald and his mostly normal life, with occasional asides to ask his friends why nora is acting so crazy.

it's just. these parallels have been tormenting me since i noticed them, because just. why would you write a relationship/characters like this, and then give them consequences that a 19th century author refused to give his characters even when being actively censored??????? i cannot fathom gamble's mind.

the thing about s6 is that it is very unintentionally just. what if a doll's house was written from torvald's pov