#horror is fundamentally about a lack of information ->

[leefi]

TFTBN Read-through | Part 3: Chapters 22-34

Part 1: 1-14 | Part 2: 14-22 | Part 3: 22-34 | Part 4: 34-64 | Part 5: 64-80 | Part 6: 81-90 | Part 7: 90-100 | Part 8: 100-127 (caught up here)

I was flipping through the pages, looking for interesting parts, when a sheet of parchment suddenly came loose from another section much deeper into the book. Unlike the rest, the material looked new, probably only replicated in the last year or two.

Curious, I lifted it up, and folded it open. To my surprise, the text was dark red, and said--

YOUR LIFE IS IN DANGER

DO NOT TRUST ANY WITHIN THE INNER CIRCLE

FIND THE ARCHIVE ON THE TOP FLOOR OF THE MAIN BUILDING

REMEMBER YOUR OATH ⬇️ SHES GONNA GET MURDEREDDDDDDD WOOHOOOOOOO SWEEP SWEEP SWEEP SWEEP SWEEP

actually I wonder if Theodoros chan’s gonna get murdered actually. Son of a high-ranking member, asked Su to go to his room last night in front of everyone, was walking around alone with Su and Bardiya and milf mentor. Su would be the prime suspect with only Ran to vouch for her.

He was a young man, though not resembling of the others in our class. He had ear length, light brown hair, a light-bronze complexion, and quite delicate-looking features... Yet they somehow didn't come across as immature. In fact, he was surprisingly good looking, to the point that there was something reminiscent of a statue in his appearance. ⬇️ LUKA???????? Oh my god this guy acts exactly like Luka too Su said he was looking at her funny...does he recognize her, but she doesn't recognize him? I know a luka when i SEE ONE. THAT BOY KNOWS WHAT'S GOING ON. HE IS A LOOPER LIKE SU!!!

or maybe he's just silly idk!!! hehe

but why does he seem to remember/recognize her and she doesn't? does it have something to do with her request in the first chapter??? did she REQUEST TO FORGET??? how could u leave ur looping bestie like that wtf su that's so mean did he leave the note for her? he wasn't at the dinner!! maybe he slipped it into the book and knew she would read it then! hmmm but the note could have also been placed there long before they met and that wouldn't really explain the timestamp on when it was written...what was it 1-2 years ago? i guess not. omgggg iim so excited to see more of him i hope he doesnt die in five minutes ill be so sad forever

Falafel, pita bread with various stuffings, steak and egg porridge, cheese salad; high quality Ysaran food, all well prepared by Yantho, SWANA CUISINE SWEEPING THE NATION I still remember the shakshuka and lahmebajeen from ran and su’s lunch

I feel like kam has a crush on su and has no idea how to contextualize it beyond an academic rivalry — su is hopelessly in love with ran and completely unaware of the fact that she is — ran holds a dislike for su for some reason, but still cares for her. her feelings seem extremely complicated.

The ransu(? no names given but assuming) childhood scene on the beach omg…that was cute oh noooo 😭 ok they did get my ass with that one.

hmm idk if that was ransu because the other girl's personality was very different from ran's. but also this could have been long enough ago that ran's personality has drastically changed since then

Big brother is very good at his role! Sekhmet said. Unfortunately, he is also extremely stupid. He can only really think about the things he has been told to do. I have seen him try to think about other things, and it is slow and bad and embarrassing for everyone. ⬇️ Kindest younger sibling interaction

Ok here’s my death prediction list 1. Utsu (botched - she’s meant to be killed but someone dies in her place) 2. milf mentor 3. Theo 4. Another inner circle member/staff (probably a combination with 1+2) Regrettably I think kam is going to live forever

I’ve disagreed with kam on literally everything so far but especially this aversion she has towards solving a problem she won’t get to benefit from (“let us be the last”). She’s so…childish? It’s a very childish point of view.

this adherence to gender a lot of characters hold really surprises me...i figure this far out in the future everyone would be a lot more fluid!!! what's with this obsession with antiquity (@ the characters/setting not lurina)

What I also don’t understand is why humanity didn’t just clone from the original 10k then continue having children biologically (or like test tubeically. ykwim). Are 10k humans enough to avoid a genetic bottleneck? whats the minimum viable population size for humans I’m not a biologist

Ok according to one article the number is 98. That is too low. who said that. lets kill him Another says 14,000 ok if you average those two guys out you get 7k 🙄 they’re fine. assuming good genetic diversity from the source group you probably wouldn’t even need to monitor for inbreeding. Why are they doing this complicated shit and causing mental prolapse.

THAT BRINGS ME BACK TO THE POINT ABOUT THE CLONES TOOOOO CLEARLY THEY HAVE THE TECH TO MAKE VIABLE CLONES WITH A CLOSED & SAFE SOURCE SUPPLY WHY ARE YOU WORKING AGAINST BIOLOGY…UR EFFORTS WOULD BE BETTER SPENT DEVELOPING A WAY TO TRANSFER HUMAN CONSCIOUSNESS FROM ONE BODY TO ANOTHER RATHER THAN MAINTAIN AN AGING BODY!!!!

Hmmm. Actually I wonder if Su’s grandpa had a similar idea. Considering the weird identity thing she has going on. Nothing to explicitly suggest this yet i think? just somethign to keep in mind considering he was voted off the polycule

I also wonder if that was related to the conversation regarding the Phoenix and the Dragon. maybe transfer of consciousness leads to loss of memory? But that wouldn’t make sense if the tech was perfect, everything would move over, leaving the old body a blank slate…what would that do to a brain, psychologically, seeing one’s former body in a dead state? also what would it do to an empty brain to suddenly be inhabited by foreign electrical synapses harboring thousands of memories preferences likes/dislikes etc. would it fight back/resist?

Im thinking back to those scratches on the wall in the kitchen. Obviously super freaky shit like 10 chapters ago but we had no context to it (we still don’t) so it was like whoops! There’s that. lol. Couple things: - did someone bake the missing chef into 🤔 a roast? - those tally marks may have been the missing chef’s and she was trapped in that room for years (thousands of marks, I think they said. Denoting days, maybe?) and then she died - But that doesn’t explain the distinct lack of skeleton in the room. Or in the roast - who would have it out for the chef - why - Hmmmm - You guys ever read that short story in high school english about the lady with the rack of lamb and the officers

Anyways that chef is definitely deads. In the kitchen? Probably not. In their tummies? Noooo (<- secretly hoping yes). Floating in the abandoned plane ocean? Yassss

Lurina is AMAZING at dropping really disturbing nuggets in the middle of a passage then distracting the characters/keeping things going. I just wish I was more engaged with the pacing :(

Good heavens," Kam exclaimed. "Are these guns?" They were, and in no small number. I could see at least fifteen rifles and ten pistols, and they weren't antiques. They looked like refractor weapons, the bronze still carrying the vivid sheen of recent production ⬇️ If this story turns into a COD lobby in the next 5 minutes im reading it forever

WTF DEAD CHEF SWEEP

Ok I have to put a bookmark on where I am in the story so far. Chapter 33! I will continue to read through it slowly but am done with the reactions for now :) bye byeeeeee

[gyokutoll]

This isn't a conversation I want to have any more than necessary, nor belabor any point which is like? Uncomfortable. I've made the ethos of this blog pretty clear even through my rules, which is all a way of saying that the following headcanon is going to contain information which will be upsetting.

The topics and themes explored in it won't be done with any voyeuristic gusto or needlessly descriptive language, but it is going to be plainly explored with what I hope comes across as emotional maturity and intellectual integrity to the scope of "these things happen, and the fallout of these events don't stop even when the event is concluded."

The audience that I create for is, quite honestly, mainly myself and the things I want to see handled better in media with the nuance, love and care that I would like. Anyways, long preamble, but I just want to preemptively re-establish my values for new followers and why I believe that at least commenting on this with Hotaru is a narrative necessity and informs much of how he behaves.

The thing about Hotaru, that I find fundamentally inextricable from him as a character, is that he's someone who has experienced s/xual violence and coercion and that these experiences inform much of how he views other people and how he interfaces with them. SA is not something that stops having lingering effects on a person just because they have been separated from their abuser, and there's often this push for someone to be a "good" survivor and to behave in ways which we find sympathetic. When it comes to heavy abuse, many audiences find it distasteful when people respond in ways which don't align with their sensibilities, but these responses are a natural consequence of unimaginable horror.

And that's really what Hotaru is, a horror character taking the horror tropes classically associated with women and imposed onto a male character instead. But I think if we're going to continue this conversation, it's important to recognize that the main idea is that of bodily autonomy and the fact that many women in horror games have theirs denied to them. I think of Silent Hill 3 and in Haunting Ground where it is important for the woman to function as an incubator. I similarly think of Bloodborne and the violence the women there face and the impetus being placed onto them to carry young that they don't want. This particular aspect of the trope doesn't apply to Hotaru because he lacks the parts to have that be a reality for him, but we're working under this idea known as "taking".

Something is "taken" from the woman. Her virginity, her autonomy, her dignity, her body, etc etc. Barring the idea of virginity as a social construct, there is an inherent degradation in the idea of the deflowering of a woman. For Hotaru, the things being taken from his body are his own flesh and blood, his organs. This isn't the same kind of indignity as forced birth, but when we recontextualize it beneath the lens of "the body as something to use and take what is needed", the allegory makes a little bit more sense.

However, this isn’t a perfect one-to-one and I would argue there is another component about this which I find vital, which is the idea that men cannot be assaulted in this way, that they are socialized to be the conqueror in the vast majority of societies. This belief is also why Hotaru has not confided these experiences in anyone, but I’m getting a bit ahead of myself.

Hotaru’s relationship with Sadao was, by all accounts, abusive, but needs to be understood through the lens of various cycles being at play there. Hotaru had been bullied as a child and relatively isolated, which developmentally gave him low self-esteem. Having moved to Tokyo to attend medical school and the like, he was further isolated due to the cultural differences he had with his peers and the fact that he had never properly learned to socialize with them in that way. Not to say that Hotaru did not know how to talk to people, but the types of conversations we would typically expect from someone trend-minded and plugged into the dominant culture were not present with him. He was always someone sweet, reserved, and awkward, which made him ideal for Sadao to form a relationship with.

Sadao himself, as a Witch, came from a place of emotional neglect and social derision. Though yokai and Witches are an understood part of Hotaru’s society, they’re still met with derision. Sadao’s own relationship with his mother was fraught. He and Hotaru were parallels in that they both had absent fathers, but present mothers, this commonality bonded them. Somewhat. Sadao’s mother wasn’t so kind to him as Hotaru’s mother was. There was a lot of resentment there I’d like to discuss another time in detail for a proper Sadao post. Regardless, Sadao’s own history of abuse and neglect resulted in someone who was charming in order to survive. Whereas Hotaru had remained awkwardly authentic, Sadao had learned to use charm as a weapon and to obfuscate the worst parts of himself, but in a culture that already disenfranchised him for being a queer man and a Witch, there was this fervent need for control, especially for the things that he cared about.

It is important to remark that I do not intend on defending Sadao, as the things he did to Hotaru are indefensible. I do think there is value in stories where Abuser Bad and are defeated accordingly, but when it comes to day-to-day life, they are generally the product of something else and aren’t usually born wanting to commit harm, and those reasons for committing harm tend to be extremely tangled and contradictory and raw and bleeding and painful.

It needs to be understood that Sadao did love Hotaru, and it was because he loved Hotaru he felt this heightened, panicked control—this fervent need to monopolize Hotaru. Sadao did legitimately see Hotaru as the best thing in his life, but it was a situation where the tighter he gripped, the more he frightened Hotaru, but Hotaru stayed regardless. Hotaru had never been in a romantic relationship before at the time and due to his self-esteem issues, had been stunned that anyone would want him. His desire to want to fix Sadao, to stay with him in hopes that his love for Sadao would fix him, ultimately fell on deaf ears, but it’s their issues feeding into each other. Sadao desperately needed to feel strong in a society which made him feel worthless, and Hotaru desperately craved acceptance and not being othered. He dropped out of medical school for Sadao, he did whatever Sadao told him to. He accepted anything and everything that Sadao gave because he internalized within himself that he was at fault.

This need to please another and to please them so thoroughly put Hotaru into situations where he was s/xually coerced. These encounters weren’t violent, but they weren’t consensual either. Hotaru’s trauma response, of the fight flight or fawn list, is that of fawn. His default mode to many things is appeasement because it feels easier and like less harm will come to him if he does. So he gave in. Whenever Sadao wanted intimacy, Hotaru would give it even if he had been physically assaulted prior for irritating Sadao or speaking to Sadao in a way which Sadao did not approve. This was assault. Even if not at knifepoint, gunpoint, or immense violence, it was still assault, and something which would scar Hotaru’s ability to have intimacy with others.

The order of events next gets a bit stilted and messy. Hotaru started working at his first host club with Sadao’s permission, but Sadao eventually grew to resent that of which Hotaru did and would go back and forth on whether or not Hotaru should quit. Hosting is also extremely draining work that requires constant performance, so Hotaru was slipping in his ability to accommodate Sadao due to his fatigue. Their relationship ended when Sadao nearly strangled Hotaru to death for not saying exactly what he wanted him to say. The idea of control slipping and losing Hotaru terrified him, but resulted in him losing Hotaru regardless, because that was the final encounter which frightened Hotaru so much that he left him (and then getting cursed by Sadao after).

This unfortunately made him more vulnerable to hosting. Hosting isn’t supposed to be s/x work, but often is. There is a whole longer culture to this component, but to keep it short and sweet: no, trading s/xual favors for company in hosting isn’t legally permissible, and neither is it by the metric of a club’s rules, but many are glad to turn a blind eye if it increases profit for the talent and club. Also, depending on a club’s policies and whether or not they protect their talents, it can lead to a high pressure environment where they provide those “services”, but it’s really coercion.

Due to the nature of abuse and how certain behaviors remain if not addressed properly, and make someone more susceptible to abuse if left untreated, Hotaru was in an environment where he did partake in this even if he did not want to, even if with people he was not normally attracted to. In conversations of s/xual abuse, the dynamic is normally that of man and woman, and yes, other men did make unwanted passes onto Hotaru, but women did as well. There is a pervasive belief by many that women cannot taken advantage of men in this way, but it can and does happen. It did happen to Hotaru, and it’s something he’s never spoken of nor shared precisely due to the fact that he doesn’t expect to be believed in referencing these encounters. That, and he doesn’t have the expectation that someone would care enough to recognize the pain of this.

Hotaru, due to this hosting environment, was abusing substances. I don’t want to get into this much more beyond this portion, but he did indeed take part in “party culture” which involved substance abuse and s/xual promiscuity. Though I hesitate to label the latter as that because many of the encounters were coercion from men and women alike and with Hotaru in various states of sobriety where he could have not reasonably consented.

In many depictions of surviving this kind of abuse, it’s often associated with hypers/xuality or s/xual aversion. Hotaru is neither, I would classify him as belonging to the camp of dissociation. Every time these things would happen to him, Hotaru would mentally check out and let them happen as they would and try to forget about it later. Each encounter was mechanical and without any pleasure. It was done because he felt as if he had to—I’m pointing at that fawn response of his. He was afraid, vulnerable, and not doing financially well during this time of his life. Hosting does not start as luxurious and for some hosts, it never becomes that way. It did for Hotaru because he adapted well, but it also came at the cost of his body and his mental health.

His habits during this time were increasingly self-destructive because Sadao has cursed him shortly after their break up. This is where we round back to this idea of “taking”. Hotaru may not have a womb to “take”, but the spiritual through line of these things follows similar ideas that we see in female protagonists in horror games. His body was taken but also remains taken by yokai. The word “devoured” carries multiple connotations. Not every death Hotaru has is an allusion to SA, not every moment of being eaten alive is meant to represent that, but the purposeful ambiguity of what “dignity” means in a story and what access to a body could potentially symbolize is absolutely purposeful.

I realize this is nearly 2,000 words of extremely depressing analysis, but themes like these are very heavy and they’re not something I want to brush over. I want these themes and ideas to be represented with the nuance, love, care, and concern for what life means for the victim after these encounters. I frequently find myself dissatisfied in media with how these things happen, and are then treated like, “well! That’s over with! We don’t need to think about it anymore!”

Because in real life, it still impacts the victim, it isn’t an “arc” that they get to walk away from.

These encounters are why Hotaru views people as inherently selfish and self-satisfying, that people lack the capacity to meaningfully care for other people, because Hotaru reflects on this time very cynically. No one expressed concern for him, no one pushed water into his hands and told him to sober up, no one led him away from people who leered at him. So long as everyone was getting paid, his safety and well-being didn’t matter, and these things didn’t really happen to him because he was a man. These are lessons Hotaru hasn’t forgotten, and they will impact how he handles intimacy nowadays.

Because Hotaru has never been in a functional romantic relationship before, he doesn’t believe that they exist. And, supposing that he does overcome this hurdle, it doesn’t mean he’s going to do well in a s/xual context. I still imagine him as someone who freezes up, who hesitates, who gives very passive consent because he’s terrified that he’ll drive his partner away if he declines. Hotaru has been conditioned to believe that his consent does not matter, only the desires of those that he has attached himself to. And even though he tries to keep others at a distance now and tries very hard to be unpleasant, these aren’t traits one fixes overnight. Hotaru is someone who needs a lot of time to heal from this and isn’t the most functional in a romantic context for it.

Hotaru does have a desire to be loved and valued, but does not believe that humans are inherently good enough to provide it. Hotaru finds the idea of being an object of desire nauseating, paradoxically caught in this desire for love and this repulsion of it because it feels like a fantasy. It’s why his tongue is so sharp and he’s so quick to be nasty to those who speak to him, especially men. It is not that he hates men more than women, it is that he knows that he is attracted to men, and so thus he does not want to form greater attachments to them out of fear that any attraction could deepen and further harm him.

Hotaru is a character whose world views and defense mechanisms are informed by his traumas, and I feel like in order to authentically show his facets, these things need to be mentioned. Not, as I’ve stated, for any particular voyeuristic enjoyment or authorial sadism, but in the interest of authentically representing the complexities of survivorship and how it carries on long after the precipitating event.

I don’t want to end this particular conversation on such a grim note, so I do want to point out that Hotaru finds a lot of his healing through community and letting himself be supported. Hosting, by its inherent nature, is exploitative, but he does work in an environment now that prioritizes his safety and well-being. If he informs the bouncers of ESCAPE that someone has made him uncomfortable or is following him, then they will deal with that person accordingly.

He’s also similarly begun to find value in owning a pet. Pets have been proven to be beneficial to one’s mental health and oftentimes become the nexus of personal betterment. Hotaru moved into a better apartment, stopped abusing substances and having s/x because of Susu. He did not want to raise a chinchilla in an environment hampered by a dysfunctional owner. Hotaru has been clean for years now and has no interest in returning to those past, maladaptive coping mechanisms.

He still doesn’t have much by the way of friends other than Tsugumi, but he’s started spending more time with her in order to break up the monotony of hosting, going home, sleeping. Photography has also been a benefit to his mental health and has taught him to appreciate the world outside, even if he sees it as bleak. Because, for those few moments behind the lens, it feels like he’s seeing everything with a fresh set of eyes that haven’t been rendered exhausted by the external and internal pressures of the life that he’s lived.

Hotaru isn’t healed from these things and still suffers excruciating deaths, but the fact he is actively finding things to care for and is slowly opening himself up to connections with others again is him taking that healing journey. He’s not someone stagnant, constantly licking his wounds. I still think there’s a conversation to be had about the fact that shutting trauma away and not engaging with it is not the way of solving it, Hotaru is still doing his best with the limited information that he has and doesn’t want to be defined by all that he’s suffered, even if it bleeds through how he interfaces with others and his own world views.

Trauma is complicated, unpleasant, nasty, and often does not make the victim a saint. But the most important thing about Hotaru as a character, above all of it, is resilience. His purpose as a character is to show the remarkable faculty that humans innately possess to keep going even despite suffering and despair. Hotaru, despite the things that happened to him, is still someone who cares for others even if he claims to hate humanity. He still opens doors for people, helps elderly people cross the street, feeds stray cats, lets children examine his camera, makes small talk with cafe owners. Hotaru is unflinchingly raw and human. And sometimes being human means being nasty and traumatized and bitter, but in that same paradoxical instance, it means being filled with this brimming capacity for love and light. One does not contradict the other. The human psyche is infinitely complex and nonsensical and I want that demonstrated in Hotaru.

He’s the sort of person to be bitter and closed off and will tell someone to leave him alone, but he’s also the same person to sit down and tend to their wounds even if he insulted them literally hours prior.

I hope this analysis doesn’t seem like anything other than a love letter for the human experience and also Hotaru himself. Everything I’ve given him has never come from a malicious place, but rather a place of wanting to see someone experience horrible things, but not be beaten down by it, to still find things worth loving in the world, even if they’re as simple as a chinchilla in a cage and a camera on the table.

[merik72-blog]

What if Furina wasn't a girlfailure for 500 years? (Shorteneder Version (still long))

Off the top, I'm not a lore expert. If this doesn't make sense lore-wise, feel free to tell me all about it. Expect it, even. I just wanted to write this down because after experiencing her story, (when it dropped months ago in version 4) this idea just never got out of my head. I process media in a way where I'm constantly thinking on the level of "why did the authors make these specific decisions?", and I couldn't shake the feeling that the authors lacked a bit of imagination when considering just how long 5 centuries is. I have like over a thousand words of why I think this which includes a discussion of historicity and biblical allusion. I cut it all -- nobody wants to read that.

That being said, this is somewhere between a rewrite and like a notes document. In this, Furina is still fundamentally the same character. Her personality and mannerisms should be basically identical, even if she's more competent. This rewrite hopes to preserve the main beats of her arc: The confrontation by Arlecchino, the disaster which causes people to doubt her godliness, the trial, and a backstory which makes you pity her. I'm going to lay these out in chronological order, rather than plot order.

Backstory

Focalors told Furina the prophecy, leaving her terrified and overwhelmed. All the people of Fontaine will drown, and she will be left alone, crying on her throne. Despite her horror, some rebellious gumption rose up in her soul and allows her to steel herself. Much like Focalors before her, despite being handed a doomed situation, Furina decided that there was nothing she couldn't fight back against, even fate. Knowing that there's a flood coming, she put together a plan.

Furina decided that she would hold grand competitions every decade, gathering the greatest tinkerers, engineers, architects, anyone with interesting ideas in her nation to show off their most creative inventions, no matter what those inventions did. She would call these competitions Fontaine's Utopique Rendezvous for Industrie Nouvelleté, et Audacé* (FURINA). As their god, Fontainian culture was her privilege and responsibility to shape, so innovation and technological advancement would be placed at the core. With great patience, she would lead Fontaine from the Medieval age to the Industrial revolution. During FURINAs, as she strolled through the streets of Fontaine, the entrants displayed and described their creations to her to each would be personally judged by her. There is not a maximum or minimum of winners, there are only those who do and do not catch the eye of the Hydro Archon. At the end of the competition, she rewards the winners with her patronage to sponsor them and their ideas. These winners would come to be informally known as FURINA Scholars. She created these patron relationships usually with the goal of creating or improving a public infrastructure project or taking a particularly fascinating or promising invention from an impractical novelty to mass producible technology that anyone could use. FURINA Scholars had a hard time limit of 10 years, being required to present their progress publicly at the next FURINA by the latest. The results of these varied from practical, aesthetic, to insanely niche novelty toys you'd expect a French aristocrat to buy.

A lot of real kings and queens can't dedicate themselves to advancement in this way because their bureaucracy, the power structure beneath them, know that they don't have to be beholden to them forever. Each bureaucrat knows there will be another younger ruler eventually who would could be manipulated into giving more to them and less to the people. Not so with Furina. She would use the royal coffers however she wanted to, and nobody could speak out against her, lest they be hit with the combination blasphemy-treason from the judgement of the Oratrice Mechanique d'Analyse Cardinale.

(*This is intentionally butchered French, in line with the Oratrice Mechanique d'Analyse Cardinale. If you can't read it, it's basically Fontaine's Utopian Conference for Industry, Novelty, and Audacity. It's a funny acronym, and a bit on the nose in multiple ways, but I think it would be something she would come up with. I imagine that Furina would never call it FURINA, but over time people would start calling it "the FURINA" and eventually "the FURINA de Fontaine" in the way that people always start butchering acronyms when they become normal words.)

Every day, Furina's free time between these FURINAs was spent studying, learning, testing, and inventing in her study. If Fontaine was to be flooded by rising waters, she herself would be dedicated to finding a way to allow Fontaine to survive any flood. Out of the public eye, she found ways to spend every spare moment honing her skills and iterating her designs. She quickly learned to dismiss attendants that came to her with some spurious legislative work whenever she left the Opera Epiclese. Go to Neuvillette! She had a duty which so obviously rendered such things spurious. Paperwork? When Fontaine could be drowned any year now?

(Just as in the real story, it's implied that Neuvillette is vaguely aware that she must be working incredibly hard, but she deliberately hides her toil from everyone, including him.)

Obsessively, tirelessly, she toiled single-mindedly towards in designing super-structures capable of diverting, pumping, or otherwise controlling vast amounts of water. As she would sketch mockups of grand designs, she was thinking of public excuses for doing this rather than just using her "archon powers." It would make her seem more benevolent to say something like "I cannot be everywhere at once, and I need to be sure that the people of Fontaine shall not suffer a disaster under my rule, even out from under my watchful gaze." It was even true, in a way. Over the centuries, she carried out plans for every major Fontaine settlement's coastline and the entire capitol city to be protected by works of engineering which were equally intricate and gargantuan. At the same time, they balanced preserving the beauty of coastlines and consistency in aesthetic that is paramount for France. She directed the creations of these superstructures over generations with clarity and consistency in intent. She eventually became capable of concocting ideas that were not possible with currently invented technology, her innovation outdoing the rate of technological advancement. That meant she was not nearly finished. Waiting for technology to catch up with her ideas was always a good opportunity to update the physical build of her superstructures.

Despite her having already gathered vast and unmatched generational knowledge after her first full century of study, she still continued FURINAs to find the best and brightest minds of each generation. (If it must be done for Genshin's thematic consistency or ideology, these can all even be vision holders). These inventors who all grew up in the context of Furina's unparalleled genius had the privilege of standing on the shoulders of a giant. Innovations begot innovations, forming a virtuous loop which drove unprecedented progress in industrialization leading to evolutions in technology especially in civil engineering and hydrodynamics. As Furina's knowledge and mastery over engineering slowly but surely surpassed mortal limits, FURINAs seemed to be more and more judged based on eccentric, incomprehensible whims. With relative frequency, participants would watch seemingly impressive inventions be passed over, meanwhile random toys that just made her giggle and applaud would win. She would say "I just find these trinkets so charming!" but in truth, she saw potential in central conceits in inventions that had the chance to change the underpinnings of Fontaine's infrastructure. Or she just genuinely found them charming.

As time passed, Furina's structures continually improved to a point that they did not just avoid, but very publicly Dominated countless floods and storms that would have been disastrous otherwise. These creations legitimized her godhood and won her adoration in the eyes of the people, who wove countless folktales over the ages telling the tales of Furina's power - herding hurricanes and subjugating tsunamis. At the same time, this made her prodigious skill for the dramatic arts even more impressive through the plurality of her talents. This resulted in many full circle moments, where Furina would play herself in epics about her overcoming disasters, not that she wrote, of course. These would sometimes exaggerate her powers, like giving her omniscience or visions of the future, the perfect designs flowing freely and naturally from her hands, as though they were as effortless as breathing.

Of course, she was not truly invincible. Slowly, she started to fray. As new innovations became more difficult, technology caught up to her designs. After the superstructure renovations commemorating the 4th century of her rule, she was distraught. This was the first time she had updated her superstructures without the plan for the next one at least partially completed. She needed to spend more of her energy pondering, as just her "free" time was insufficient. This led to her to becoming more absentminded during official duties, having forgone sleep or being still caught up ruminating on how to optimize designs, improve existing technology, or apply them in a novel way, but for some reason nothing was coming to her after a few years of different experiments and trials. Even in discussions with her FURINA Scholars, they stopped having new ideas in hydrodynamic engineering projects, being drawn towards other directions where they wouldn't need to compete with god. As she crossed the 450-year mark, she was becoming increasingly aware of the fact that her designs weren't nearly enough to protect the entire country and even further from perfect. For the better part of the last century, any improvement had been like trying to squeeze water from a stone. In the last ten years, she has probably improved her latest flood barriers by less than a liter of water. 30 more years restarting from scratch over and over with her current knowledge, no meaningful improvement.

For the 48th FURINA, she decided out of desperation to hold a hydro-themed FURINA. As she walked the streets of Fontaine, talking to each inventor as they presented their work, she was distraught. A marked decrease meaningful innovation. Worse than this, she noticed that inventors were less interested in creating submissions for this FURINA. The sentiment she was picking up on was that they felt futility in even trying. What was the point of trying to innovate in a field that they can hardly understand? The cutting edge of hydro-related innovation was driven so far by Furina that they felt mortals need not apply. Who could even be given the privilege of becoming the decade's FURINA Scholars from such a lackluster field...? As always, she found a way to get out of a dismaying situation. She crowned herself as the winner, made a grandiose speech about who she was still unmatched in the domain of Hydro, and unveiled her side project of the Aquabus.

At the end of the hydro-FURINA, Furina had never felt so alone. For the first time since her first decade, she had not the faintest idea of what to do from here. Nobody did. She had already pushed to and past limit of her knowledge, of her peoples' knowledge, and the limits of material possibility in Teyvat. All of these centuries had passed her by, all these sleepless nights, all her evolutions in the design of Fontaine to fortify it, for what? A worm, wriggling on a stone, drying out in the sun. If she failed to prevent the flood now, what would any of that time mean?

Furina found herself standing in her study, towering alone above the room crowded with her innovations, blueprints, experiments. Her gaze floated over each page; her life's work surrounded her. Broken mechanisms, meaningless scribbles, trials without results. Countless wasted mines of materials, countless wasted gallons of ink, and countless wasted centuries of labor by her precious hardworking people. Not realizing she was fully sobbing, she slumped to the floor, picking up the blueprint of one of her latest redesigns. She couldn't see anything aside from bodies floating in the water. Her mind replayed the faces of every person whom she's ever worked with or learned from, whose families she met, and every child of Fontaine whom she watched grow. They died all the same. Her vision started to swirl as their faces closed in around her. They rose up all around her from the waters in her blueprints. She grasped at them desperately, begging them to stay with her. On her side, shaking, sobbing, with a bundle of ripped and crumbled papers clutched against her. For the first time since she was told the prophecy, she felt truly helpless. Out of the corner of her eye, she saw her mirror. She scrambled through a carpet of papers, trinkets, and tools to touch her forehead to the glass.

"Mirror me, I-I've been doing everything I can. Our people have been trying, too! They worked so very hard, and they've built my all of designs beautifully."

Silence.

"Please, tell me you know something, anything that I can do now. I need to know. I can't let it end like this."

Silence.

"I never imagined that... that we'd even make it this far, mirror me." Furina was sitting now. With a smile on her face, she still couldn't stop the tears as she leaned against the mirror. "They truly are my pride and joy." Barely more than a whisper, an "I'm sorry" escaped her lips.

She had been doing her best for so long, but she had certainty now. Her best would not be enough.

A real Archon would be able to overcome this. On her own strength.

Furina cursed her inadequacy, mourning the people of Fontaine in her heart. It was torture. Every day, her job was to look at all the wonderful people that she was failing every day, people whom she was dooming through her weakness. During trials, she entirely lost the ability to focus on what's happening in front of her, her comments in the Opera becoming nonsensical and detached. More often, she handed off interpretations directly to Neuvillette, and tears sometimes leaked through when doing her fan meetups. Somehow, she still managed to hide her turmoil with audacious bravado as always. She felt more internally frantic as more years came and went. It was like desperately treading treacherous waters as she needed more and more effort to simply maintain surface appearances. The 49th and 50th FURINAs were brief respites from the gloom. Despite all of the stress in her life, the silly novelties of her people could still bring her joy. But when she returned to her private abode, she found that sometimes, not every time, she didn't want to work anymore. Instead, she would lay in her bed. Stillness without rest.

Her dead eyes blinked slowly, making no tears. She pondered, "How long has it been?" When she stared down at her hands, she could still see the souls of every Fontanian leaking through her fingers. The harder she tried to hold onto them, the further they'd splatter away. If only she had more time. Time, as always, passed anyway.

Plot time

Now, this is when the incident happens. Furina just hit rock bottom as the Traveler comes to town. Everything in the plot that played out in the main story happens mostly the same. This retroactively explains why all of Furina's arguments in the Mysterious Disappearances trials are so weak. Sure, she has a lot of experience presiding over trials, and it may be a top priority for her since this Furina is also excited about the opportunity for a Grand Trial that Focalors told her about, but she is so far from being on the top of her game right now.

Over centuries, Furina built this idea of infallibility, weaving a narrative to reaffirm her godhood. Fontainians believed that because each design was crafted by Furina directly, she made sure that none of them could ever fail using her uniquely intimate knowledge of the Hydro element. When Arlecchino called for an audience with Furina about the impending incident of unprecedented scale in Poisson, Furina was not just small or helpless with no excuse. Furina imposed upon Arlecchino as a god in her own land. There was to be absolute faith in her creations. Her power over hydro would never allow a Fontainian to come to harm.

"What does a puny rat like you think you know? I've thrown out socks that were older than you. Smarter, too."

Like a true god, she gaslit Arlecchino about what information Arlecchino had regarding the flood coming to Poisson. As the Regina of All Waters, not only did she have access to more information through her national information network, she also simply understood Hydro in a way that mortals couldn't comprehend. This is one of the only times that Arlecchino would seem even a little shaken by anything.

Furina didn't refuse to take precautions because she's a depressed NEET; Furina placed herself in this position where she simply could not possibly even suggest taking precautions. That would imply to Arlecchino and by extent the people of Fontaine that there was a weakness in her absolute power over Hydro and, by proxy, her status as archon. In previous centuries, she had only ever commanded upgrades to earlier designs as technology advanced to allow her to better realize her intended designs.

This made it all the more world-shattering for Fontainians when the symbols of their god, their faith in her power, warped and bursted under the immense pressure of more water than seemingly possible in nature (this flood is mega buffed in this plotline). The damage was horrific, but would be much much worse if not for the efforts of Arlecchino and the Spina di Rosula. This was the first time that anyone has doubted her as god, and nobody who doubted even wanted to because they've had faith for so long.

The trial proceeds nearly exactly as in the game, with the additional wrinkle that her centuries of age needs to be a hint as to how she could be such a genius of engineering without being the Hydro Archon.

After the trial

After her liberation, much of Furina's story is the same. She is so incredibly burnt out after finally being free that she has the same despondent attitude as she does in the game. She doesn't really invent in her free time, as she's a bit traumatized by the memory and sensation of using those tools. Even picking up a screwdriver reminds her of hundreds of years of sleepless nights experimenting desperately with the weight of the world on her shoulders.

The only real things that would change after the Archon quest would be -

In her character quest, Furina surprises everyone by proudly declaring her return to the stage on her own, having thoroughly enjoyed her time with the ragtag troupe. After a handful of lifetimes of endless labor with a dash of theatre, having the opportunity to do theatre full time sounds like great fun. The reason that she wouldn't have started before this quest is because of her burnout and exhaustion buildup ofc.

In Roses and Muskets, just take out all the times where Furina's trauma is played for laughs, or times where she's outwardly timid in a public conversation, especially when directing. Furina's reaction to imposing in public situations should be so well trained after playing archon should be instinctual after 500 years that she never gets caught slipping by an unfortunate circumstance. In private, she can still of course be her quirky self.

At the end of Roses and Muskets, she's not awkward about receiving the trophy. She's really happy, overjoyed even, having not been able to participate in any competitions herself in Archon era.

During Lantern Rite, Furina is on Cloud 9, going crazy and stupid finally leaving the country. She is positively giggly being charmed and intrigued by every single little thing in Liyue which is different from Fontaine. She walks around the street asking people about ridiculous and mundane things, like "What wood is this fence made out of?", "Do all your boats really need sails? Where are their engines?", "What techniques were employed to build villages on all these hills?", "Where is the toilet in this establishment?... oh Me... running hydro? DO YOU NOT HAVE ANY PLUMBING-", and various other questions about architecture, technology, and everything else she'd notice as someone otherwise incredibly knowledgeable who'd been stuck in one country for centuries.

Anyway, as a thanks for reading my yap, here are some drawings of tinkerer Furina loving life

[shewholovestoread]

GYEONGSEONG CREATURE PART 1 - THE CHARACTERS (PART 2 OF 2)

Part 1 is here

The Characters:

The cast is uniformly awesome. Park Seo-joon's character, Jang Tae-sang starts off as someone who is only concerned about saving his own hide but he infuses his character with so much heart that even in the initial episodes, you end up rooting for him. The show is, very much, his hero's journey, going from someone who only cared about his own survival to one who's willing to risk his own life to protect others.

Han So-hee's character, Yoon Chae-ok was an absolute badass. She was more than capable of handling the shit that came her way. I loved that she was so confident of her abilities, she was excellent at her job. So-hee imbues her character with such deep emotion that you can tell that it's always on the simmer, her desperation warring with the bone-deep dread that her mother is dead. And then the final straw is the soul crushing horror they're confronted with when they infiltrate the hospital and find out what's been going on.

I also liked how the relationship between Tae-sang and Chae-ok developed. They start off at loggerheads with Tae-sang mocking the loss of her mother and Chae-ok seeing him as a profiteer, an opportunist. In a desperate fight for their survival against both the monster and the Japanese forces, they're forced to put aside their differences and work together and this is where they truly shine.

Their conflicting approach, where one is willing to die instead of surrendering and the other is willing to surrender to fight another day is what saves them. Chae-ok's drive to fight and keep fighting even in the face or insurmountable odds is what keeps them going when lesser people would have turned back. Tae-sang's drive to survive, to live is what keeps them alive when faced with near certain death. They fight for each other, taking the lead when the other falters.

I love that for people who seem so fundamentally different, they work so well together, perfectly complementing each other. I also love that when Tae-sang tries to save Chae-ok by asking her to leave, she refuses, she makes it clear that she doesn't need a knight in shining armour but a partner who treats her as their equal.

The other cast members are equally good, especially Kim Hae-sook as Nawol-deak, Tae-sang's 2nd in command. She's his pillar, the only person he can trust to take over the reins in his absence and she more than rises to the occasion. Unlike the others, she's unflappable, capable of thinking on her feet, weighing alternatives and wheeling and dealing the way Tae-sang does. She, like Tae-sang doesn't trust anyone (except Tae-sang.) She knows, only too well, how little it takes to break people, having gone through it herself.

Did anyone else wonder if it was Nawol-deak who gave up information that led to Tae-sang's mother getting arrested? Nawol implies that faced with relentless pain, people are willing to do anything to make it stop. That entire conversation and the flashback that followed, made me think if it was Nawol who finally broke and gave up information about her comrades.

Then there was Choi Young-joon playing Lieutenant General Gato, the most hateful character on the show, followed very closely by Hyun Bong-sik's Ichiro. The absolute lack of humanity they exhibit is far more monstrous than any other monster they could create. I'm pretty sure Gato is a psychopath. His quest to make a monster has nothing to do with patriotism. His military rank is a means to an end, it gives him the power and authority he needs to conduct his experiments with little to no oversight. He doesn't see other people as human beings, they are all, both the soldiers and locals alike, test subjects. The locals are used as lab-rats and monster bait while the soldiers serve to test just how much damage the monster can withstand, it's killing power and finally whether it can think and solve problems. The only thing Gato sees as worthwhile is the monster itself.

I would not be surprised if, in part 2, there was increased tension between Gato and Ichiro. Ichiro sees the monster as a mindless killing machine while to Gato, it's a like piece of art, it's an extension of his own genius and he would not take kindly to another scientist taking over. We saw it in Part 1 when Ichiro tried to train the monster, taking a page out of Ivan Pavlov's experiment, Gato's displeasure at Ichiro inserting himself into his work. This is not a man who shares or tolerates interference of any kind. I see conflict brewing between them that will perhaps be the source of their own downfall.

The other person who was absolutely spellbinding was Kim Soo-hyun as Lady Yukiko Maeda. Her portrayal is just... so intimidating. She's the perfect blend of gentility and menace. She has an ice cold demeanor that unsettles you even as her beauty disarms you and draws you in. By the time the show ends, there is no doubt who has the actual power in the Ishikawa home. This is a woman who will slit your throat and calmly drink tea and watch as you slowly drown in your own blood. it's a chilling portrayal and I can't wait to see more of her in Part 2.

I am excited for Part 2 to see how they close season 1 since season 2 is already in production. We do know that Chae-ok, her father and the rest from The House of Golden Treasure will launch a rescue mission for Tae-sang. I don't think Chae-ok will be content to leave Tae-sang behind, not to mention her mother's monster form is still inside.

Add to that, Myeong-ja is now infected and she will wreak havoc once she transforms (assuming she survives,) she is outside and she's pregnant. With Chae-ok's mother, we can see just how much the Najin caused her to mutate. I have a feeling that Myeong-ja's baby will be a hybrid, even more dangerous than the monster inside the hospital. It's also safe to assume that almost all of the antagonists will survive.

If you're hoping for a clean resolution in the season finale, you're in for disappointment. I have a feeling that the season will end with a broadening of the threat and our heroes will have to contend with not just those despicable scientists, Gato and Ichiro, they will also have the Japanese army after them after Kwon Joon-taek ratted them out.

I'll be happy as long as the season doesn't end with a cliffhanger. Season 2 is scheduled to stream in 2024, so on the plus side, at the very least, it's not a long wait. For now, I shall patiently wait for Part 2 and hope for the best...

[blindrapture]

july 14.

Fears. there are many. you won't believe how many. Act 2 introduces to the ensemble of villains, though whether it truly introduces us to all of them is something you'll just have to wait and see. .........no, the answer is no, it introduces us to less than half of them. rapture's a big story, you know that by now. there's a lot of villains, they're not all Fears.

they won't all receive Art, though yes that would have been cool. some of them are like the Ruin (rapture's take on The Cold Boy), who didn't have much of a role in the original story but is at least getting a second try now. and some of them are like the Ecclesiarchway (y'know, the Archangel), who had a big role but only got, like, the one piece of rapture art. that art went to the July 8th log, if you'll recall.

Fears are cool, though. if you're reading this and you have no idea what I'm talking about, because the Fear Mythos is not actually the widespread corner of pop culture I think it is, then explaining them isn't gonna be hard. you know the slender man. I did a whole ramble about him as an example of Internet Fiction on June 23rd. he was a collective writing project. some people made Images about him, some people wrote stories (Blogs) about him, some people made videos (Vlogs) about him. well, in 2011 some other people wanted to do that but with more monsters. the blog format was good enough to warrant some more damn subject matter. and those "more monsters" were the Fears. there were too many Fears to list here. in Rapture I tried to incorporate all of them, up to a point. eventually I did stop incorporating the new ones, though in the Final Draft I threw in more references.... dammit it doesn't matter. the point is horror monsters. Rapture is fundamentally informed by an awareness of blog fiction, which usually is in the genre of lite cosmic horror. there, now you know what the Fears are. and EAT was a Fear I made. good, we're on the same page.

and clearly, if we lived in a world where all the cryptids were real and talked to each other, and then the sky turned red and all hell broke loose, then we would expect to see days like today, where the Fears just leap on whole crowds of people and try to cause some carnage.

you gotta understand. the Fears are from a genre that is entirely horror, all the way through. and I am not someone who holds horror as sacred. so in Rapture I wanted the Fears to be vulnerable, emotional, petty panicking people. I wanted the Fears to get talked back to, and for them to just have to take that. I wanted the Fears to make mistakes, funny mistakes, and compelling mistakes. I wanted a story that could go beyond found-footage lite-cosmic-horror. hell, I wanted to show, or remind, Internet Horror writers that there are in fact ways to write something scary that require not sticking to any one genre.

what kind of scary is Giygas? can we honestly call Earthbound a horror story? no, dammit. Earthbound is 100% not horror. it's closest in genre to a road novel, actually. its focus is the vibes of a world that you choose to find connection in. if you allow yourself to get compelled, then it will take you on a rollercoaster that no video game had heretofore prepared you for. the comedy comes from specific places, and your worry for the well-being of characters comes from specific places too. the horror almost seems camp for most of the experience. it's only after Stonehenge that the game stops holding up a smile for long enough that you start to reconsider what to expect from the final area. (and if you have never seen the last stretch of Earthbound before somehow, then. check it out. find a way to sit with it, take in the vibes, the soundtrack. and then get your teeth kicked in, emotionally, by that final boss.) Earthbound is the kind of thing I think about when I consider the forms of horror that The Horror Genre manages to lack (by virtue of insisting on being a genre). Earthbound changes genre, and it does so after letting you get engaged for a good 30 hours. it's not really about the exact length of time, or the proportions of the story. this isn't a bunch of ingredients in a pot that stir the right way to make the perfect story. it's entirely about expectation, and the more complicated forms of expectation that come from being committed to a story over a long period of time. making art is like being a magician.

and so, on this subject, I also think of Mother 3. in fact I tend to think of Mother 3 far more often than I ever think about Earthbound. Mother 3 is.. more of a horror story, but it still doesn't feel like one, because it still isn't one. Mother 3 is a family drama. it does have a section that goes for a road novel, and it has another section that goes for.... I mean, god, what would you call chapter 7, it's a change in video game narrative genre and that's hard to translate into a more broad talk. "adventure." sure. the scope of the narrative opens up into a broad and serious adventure. but then the scope gradually closes back up afterward, and the story ends on a pure family drama, and it does so famously. Mother 3 is a game of fucking tears, hard tears. it's literally impossible to play the game and not cry like a baby. no one has done it. there's still a lot of fear in all this. but I think "fear" is a good word here. there isn't any horror in these games, but there is fear. fear can fit into narratives that horror can't. and I am much more interested, myself, in fear than in horror.

so it's not an accident that I'm the one who named us "the Fear Mythos." once people were calling the monsters "Fears," I latched onto that word and thought it was enough. I still think it's enough. when I'm rewriting Rapture, when I'm working on Rapture, I'm doing so with pride in this being a Fear story, and I'm doing so with the commitment to make this story worthy of what that word means to me.

fear, not necessarily horror.

though Rapture also is not a Mother game. Rapture does have horror in it. it usually doesn't happen to Jordan himself, but he is the witness of a lot of horror, a lot of fates worse than death, and a lot of intense heartbreaking drama. just, what I'm saying to you here is Rapture has one foot in horror by necessity, and then its other foot is in my childhood. the things I grew up with. and the things that happened to me as I grew up, the worries I developed, the fears that my brain had to process into mere aversions and.. drama. Rapture is my drama. that's its genre. it is not committed to being a comedy, nor a horror, though it has fun playing with both. it is committed to being a drama.

I definitely got off track with this ramble, but I decided instead to talk about other general subjects that a compelled reader would need to pick up on. today's log has the Ruin do something notable that was not in any previous draft. it brings on a vision for Jordan, the contents of which are alarming, raise some questions. another genre has been introduced now. this one is the riskiest. you'll have to wait and see what I'm choosing to do with it. (and I will too.)

I'm gonna leave you with a link to some music. here's a youtube playlist. it's called "rapturework." it's what I listened to while I wrote Act 2. I actually made a point not to include prog, and not to include any songs longer than a few minutes (though there's still a prog song in there, and one or two songs in the 15-minute range, but none of them are what you'd expect). this playlist may clarify some vibes and influences. and plus you may just be curious about what I consider to be "music to write to."

alright. I said some words.

see you tomorrow.

[thespoonisvictory]

I think one of the central issues surrounding neverafter that many people are circling around and identifying symptoms of but not the cause, is that the brand of horror that brennan is going for, and the very nature of dnd are at odds with one another.

So much of horror is surrounded by a lack of agency, and the neverafter brand of horror is no different. rosamund wakes up surrounded by briars and cannot move, ylfa is a werewolf against her will, gerard is turning into a frog, pinocchio’s father’s safety is in the hands of an eldritch terror, etc etc. A lack of control over your life or surroundings is the root of so much horror, and you can see brennan try to implement that to varying success.

The issue is that... this is dnd. A game that prioritizes agency and the mechanics of turns, the fantasy of having the control to pick up a sword and fight battles you couldn’t fight in real life. It wouldn’t be a fun game if the intrepid heroes just had stuff happening to them all the time, or if brennan was visibly leading them down one course of action they couldn’t control. In dnd, the pcs choose what to do. But in horror, you’re trapped in the house. You’re transforming against your will. All you can do is try to escape, trapped on the back foot as something or someone hunts you. Moments where the protagonist takes the active stance are few and far between, and often fleeting, giving a false sense of hope.

In neverafter, Rosamund is using her action on her turn to rip briars out of her throat. Ylfa uses a bonus action to go into a rage. They choose where to go next, and roll perception checks to see what’s happening. The feeling of being overwhelmed and afraid is so rare, because you cannot put the horror of a lack of autonomy in a game that is so fundamentally about autonomy. 

The moments of most effective horror for me, such as moments in the princesses castle as they realize the scope of the enemy, rosamund locking herself in her room, even just exploring in the woods in episode 2, are always the moments when the intrepid heroes don’t know what’s going on, or what to do. But these moments have to be few and far between, because in order for it to be a fun game of dnd, they kind of need to know what’s going on.

Similarly, another large facet of most horror is a lack of information, or context. A noise is the dark, mysterious claw marks or figures in the window, a masked killer, etc etc. And Brennan has chosen to do the horror season in a fairytale season... where we almost immediately can guess the backstory of every major npc. Regardless of whether metagaming is happening, the baron of bricks is made significantly less scary for the fact that we can immediately intuit his whole deal thanks to the story he comes from. 

The pcs can roll insight checks, and brennan is not the sort of dm to skimp on backstory or philosophical context. So many conversations this season are full of ruminating on the fluffy-sweet meaning of life and writing our own story, which removes any sense of cold confusion that could come from where the intrepid heroes should go next.

The horror and the medium (as well as the premise of the story within that medium) are at odds with each other.

This post is already so long, but I need to give one example of brennan’s horror working in a different campaign to illustrate my point.

In fhsy ep 3, riz fights baron in the office. This is a famously terrifying scene, proving that d20 is capable of horror, and it cleanly avoids so many of neverafter’s problems:

1. The mechanics or backstory of baron is not apparent in any way, or ever even really revealed. All we know is that Something is in the office, and even when we see it, none of our questions are answered (is it a manifestation of lies, a servant of the nightmare king, even real in the first place? how did it get in the office, how was this mirror cursed, how did riz not notice it before?) brennan is not in a rush to explain any of this, either, as he is in na.

2. We know how the scene ends before it starts. We know that there is no good ending, there is nothing that riz can do to stop what is going to happen. Even if we didn’t, there is no magic to lean on, no friends to call that could get there in time. This creature has the jump on him, and he has no context as to how to act or what to do next. He cannot persuade or fight the creature in any way that matters.

neverafter is in such a rush to explain itself and answer philosophical questions, to send the pcs on quests, that it loses the fear and horror almost entirely. It still makes for a very fun season, but I’m not surprised that people find it unsatisfying in that regard

[oops-all-teeth]

Hey! I am, very curious to your headcannons and story for Adaru. I was wondering, if I could ask, to hear some of them, please? ‐ @classicdeadfan

hey there!

of course! i'd love to tell you about my interpretation of adaru! i'll preface this by saying that he's a character i've been fairly attached to for a hot minute, but part of writing a character for that long does mean that my version isn't maybe. strictly canon compliant. considering the lack of canon in the first place that's probably a reasonable assumption to make, but that's just a forewarning fghfg.

if there's any specific questions you want to ask, please feel free to shoot them my way! love thinking about this guy

i'm putting this under a read more, because this'll probably get pretty long.

so, if you want a good primer of my headcanons and story for adaru, i'd recommend reading the two fics i wrote ages ago on them. while i think my writing has improved since then, they're still a pretty solid summary of the earliest parts of his backstory: root of all evil and all that's golden and green. here's the cliffnotes version:

adaru was once a mortal priest in ancient sumer, and an advisor to a royal court. taken by a mix of frustration and envy, he attempts to murder the king to take his place. this goes badly.

beaten within an inch of his life and exiled, he drags himself away from the city walls and eventually finds a moment of respite in a cave, where a spirit of fate appears to him and gives him a choice: repent here and die honourably, or seek the throne of a god.

he chooses the second one. after a bit of wandering, he finds a temple of a sleeping god whose name at that point had been long forgotten, murders them in their sleep and pretty much bathes and drinks in their blood, leading to a very unpleasant ascension.

when he wakes up again, the other gods have already found him. riding high on the rush of ascending to godliness, he crowns himself as fear.

he is promptly dragged into the forest of the gods, forcefully bound to a cedar tree. after some time, he cuts himself free and staggers away.

there's a fair amount of aimless wandering as he slowly adjusts to feeding on people's fears, and on the way he accrues a gaggle of worshippers which eventually become the heralds. at this point, he is still overly fierce, proud but also very attached to his newfound flock, which he lends his power to, leaving a path of destruction where-ever they go.

unfortunately, because he's New To This, he doesn't realise the impact his power will have on them, and as time progresses they gradually wither and transform into monstrous husks of their former selves. when they lose themselves in his arm, adaru is beset by grief, at his lowest possible point.

or it would be his lowest possible point, if the other gods had not found him and punished him for the chaos he's caused, tearing the still-new wings from his back and binding him in an early version of the lantern, and abandoning him to his fate.

now grieving both the loss of his heralds and a part of himself that'll never grow back, he resolves to become something truly worthy of being called a god of fear, and sets up a few milllennia of horrors to come

these are all the earliest parts of adaru's tenure as a god, but they kind of inform the sort of god he later becomes.

on a pure like, metaphysical level, he's kind of a weak god. his body isn't that ethereal, he's very much a thing of flesh and blood (as immortal as he might be), and he's fundamentally tied to humanity. he feeds on their fear, so if humanity dies out, he'll die out with them. (this becomes a bit of a preoccupation for him.) he's still got a lot of power and knows his craft extremely well, but he's nowhere near as powerful as, say, something like lady luck, who Literally commands people's fates.

instead, he becomes known for his ruthlessness, his willingness to get his hands bloody, and a mix of being very collected and very tenacious. it is very hard to keep this guy down, and he's proud of that. also as a result of being bound to the lantern, he's way more patient than you'd expect him to be. he's not the sort to lash out or act rashly in anger; rather, he pushes down that rage, bides his time and waits for the right moment. he knows his reputation, and he knows how to cultivate it and use it to his advantage.

unfortunately, he's also still kind of a mess. due to his experiences of being widely reviled as a villain (which is, admittedly, something he's willingly cultivated), he does internalise those feelings. there's a lot of spite and grief inside this guy that he doesn't want to address, but he does tend to expect to be blamed when things go wrong, and to some extent figure he probably has deserved it. and also immortality makes it extremely easy to neglect oneself. he despises weakness in himself. and, you know. he's not exactly good at things that involve being reassuring or comforting. god of fear, and all that.

i think the way i write him, the core of his character is like. someone who is walking an uneasy line between monster, god and human, and while he's trying to be the terrifying god-monster way more, there's a humanity in there that he doesn't want to acknowledge.

um. headcanon lightning round:

he's a transgender man. this one may seem minor but i don't know i like projecting and i have a lot of feelings about how it influences his Whole Deal. also we need more big scary monster men who are transgender. special treat for me

can quite literally taste fear, and knows what different fears taste like. i'll need to write more about this but i have ideas. there are some fears he can't stand the taste of. the taste of the fear of love, for example, is far too sickly sweet for his tastes. (this does include his own. it tastes like bile.)

complicated relationship with the lantern. while it was once solely a prison, it has become a form of sanctuary to him now, and he's kind of attached to it. sometimes you need somewhere quiet.

his former wings were mothlike. he wears those false-wings as a prosthetic.

he has a lot more scars than you'd think; some he's proud of, others not so much. the scars where his wings were are a Particularly sore spot (figuratively and literally)

he can do some freaky shapeshifting nonsense. occasionally seen with more limbs, more mouths, more teeth. less often seen in human guises. it makes him uncomfortable.

generally doesn't like possession. it's trying to fit himself into a vessel that is too small, you know? also tends to have bad side effects for everyone involved

probably respects lady luck and mary the most out of everyone here. (i'm still weirded out by the implication they're heralds. doesn't feel right. usually i ignore this)

his scars should've been cuneiform. like come on it feels obvious

manifestations of his presence involve an overwhelming sense of dread and a sudden infestation of moths

occasionally wears blindfolds. usually when he's actually dressing up for more formal affairs.

looks surprisingly cool in armour

[crowandtalbot]

I want to also add that "the normies" have a colloquial understanding of "trigger" that means "makes me uncomfy". I have had the struggle of getting people to understand that is mot what the word actually means, but then they accuse me of changing definitions or accusing the world of getting too clinical. Though a well placed "your experiences are not universal and the world includes people other than yourself" has worked wonders in a few cases. I have not been able to get past not caring enough, but usually when I can get a person to admit that part they will at least get off their soap box about content warnings. I have also gotten that point across with an analogy to a blueberry allergy. That triggering does not mean "i don't like blueberries and eating them makes me not want to eat anymore". It's more like "i have a blueberry allergy and not knowing if food contains blueberries means i will not be prepared for a reaction if there is blueberries in it".

But I have way more experience with people complaining that content warnings break immersion and destroy artistic integrity and make it impossible to surprise people with scares (that's usually one for horror genre material). My best response has been "sounds like a skill issue if the creator can't integrate a content warning that doesn't do those things and still informs their audience in a meaningful way". However, as you said, if someone doesn't understand that they should care about other people already, there's not any way to convince them that there's a problem with that. I try to lean on "it's the cost of producing content for a general audience", because when it comes down to it there's things you have to put effort into even when you are not interested in them in order to do a thing. You have to be comfortable on stage to act in a play, you have to be able to cut people open to perform a surgery, you have to consider how your work effects people to make art that effects people.

Not doing so fundamentally hampers your ability to do the thing at all and any audience has the right expect a basic level of effort in presentation and also criticize you if the presentation is lacking that. I should not have to worry about people being surprise triggered watching my horror movie because it's not that bad is like saying I should not have to make a movie good for people to like it because it could be worse.

New Alt-Right Playbook, regarding the minimization of power imbalances with "enh, it's not SO bad."

If you like this and my other work, do please back me on Patreon and/or watch me on Nebula.

Transcript below the cut.

Say, for the sake of argument, you and some other folks have gotten embroiled in a debate about the use of content warnings. One side has put forth the usual case: some people have trauma or anxiety disorders, and giving them a heads up about common triggers lets them make informed decisions about how to engage with a piece of media. They aren’t always looking to walk out, even, just to avoid a panic attack by having a few moments to prepare themselves. And this is often better for everyone as more people can appreciate the work itself and the discourse doesn’t derail into another discussion about whether it should’ve had a content warning.

And then someone from the other side of the debate says, in all seriousness (and I remind you this is about whether or not people should put a single sentence at the beginning of a video, the start of a game, outside the door of a theatre), “Can’t you just, like, have your panic attack? I mean, this isn’t life and death.”

The discussion quickly and predictably devolves from there into people who have panic attacks trying to explain how miserable they are, and how comparatively simple putting up a content warning is, and you realize far too late that this whole conversation is missing the point. Because the “it’s not life and death” crowd? They never claimed they are more inconvenienced than the person having panic attack! Content warnings ain’t life and death either! They made no attempt to frame this tradeoff as fair or justified. Only that, in the grand scheme of things, it’s not so bad.

I call this Didoing.

(Relationship Discourse would call it The Tolerable Level of Permanent Unhappiness, which is a really powerful phrase, but I came up with Didoing and I’m keeping it.)

You see Didoing everywhere. Be as gay as you want, just don’t tell your commanding officer. Be trans if you must, but pee at home. Kink is fine, but keep it out of Pride. Drag is whatever, just not in front of children. Being a woman on the internet isn’t hard if you’re willing to block seventy thousand people and just use this service to scrub all your private information from the internet so men have a harder finding your home address. It’s eleven bucks a month! What, you can’t afford eleven bucks a month??!

And, yes, all these are minimizations, and, if you want, you can point that out. You can tell them what it’s like to get a Twitter DM threatening to murder your entire family using a quote from Mission: Impossible 3. Yeah, he’s probably not gonna do it! But it can still fuck up your day; the goal is to fuck up your day. But the “it’s not life and death” crowd won’t understand, not because they don’t care, but because they don’t care enough.

But even that is letting them control the conversation. You’re trying to stress the pain of a panic attack, the anxiety of a death threat, to emphasize a gulf of iniquity between their experience, as a person who does not deal with these things, and that of someone who does. As if, were the gulf smaller, it would be not so bad. In this, you have accepted their premise. Did you even catch what the premise was? That it’s okay for things to be unfair within a certain tolerance. That some people do and should take extra precaution just to exist in the world alongside the rest of us. That it’s okay for others to suffer for the convenience of the normals. Because it’s not so bad.

This is a bit different from how privilege usually works. The issue with content warnings - really, most things people Dido over - is that, if you are a person with triggers, it means other people can provoke a panic response in you against your will. The severity of that response is, frankly, immaterial: the point is, they have power over you, and, if you’re going to operate in this world as equals, you need their word that this power will not be invoked.

The usual move for people on the privileged end of a power imbalance is to deny the imbalance exists: “white privilege is a myth,” “there is no gender wage gap,” etc. etc. You would think, the greater the imbalance, the harder it is to deny, but it’s just the opposite: people Dido when the imbalance is small (or, at least, appears small in the eyes of the Didoer). It happens with content warnings, microaggressions; “no, I don’t get followed around Macy’s like I’m gonna steal something, but is that really so important? is this life and death? don’t you have bigger problems?” (Which is a funny thing to say, because, according to white privilege: no! The bigger problems don’t exist!)

Didoing is foundational to the privileged mindset, because it’s one scenario where they will admit to the Didoee, “yes, I do have power over you… and you should just let me have it.”

[usefullistanbul]

Sir Henry Elliot's Controversial Stance Amidst Massacre Reports

Sir Henry Elliot’s Response to Massacre Reports

In the wake of the harrowing reports of massacres pouring in from various quarters, a spotlight falls on the actions of Sir Henry Elliot, the British Ambassador. Questions emerge regarding his apparent reluctance to acknowledge the gravity of the situation, raising concerns about the role of diplomacy and official channels in responding to humanitarian crises.

Navigating the Complexity of Information Sources

The controversy surrounding Sir Henry Elliot centers on his refusal to believe and act upon reports of massacres, deeming them unofficial due to their non-affiliation with Turkish authorities. This raises fundamental questions about the duty of a diplomat—should their allegiance to official channels supersede the imperative to act on credible information, regardless of its source?

Dr. Long’s Pleas and the Unheeded Letters

The Rev. Dr. Long, associated with Robert College, presented Sir Henry Elliot with a substantial collection of letters detailing the horrors unfolding in the burnt districts. Astonishingly, the ambassador dismissed this firsthand and trustworthy evidence, contending that it lacked the sanctity of official status. The incident begs the question Bulgaria Private Tours: Should the pursuit of truth and the protection of human lives not transcend bureaucratic formalities?

Redefining Diplomatic Responsiveness

Commonly, diplomats are perceived as conduits of vital information, irrespective of its origin, if it serves the greater good. Sir Henry Elliot’s adherence to a rigid definition of “official information” challenges the conventional understanding of diplomatic duties. In times of crisis, is there not a moral obligation to act promptly based on credible reports, even if they lack official endorsement?

Popular Perceptions vs. Sir Henry Elliot’s Approach

Public opinion often favors the utilization of unofficial and private information, especially when dealing with urgent matters. The prevailing sentiment suggests that ambassadors should prioritize the timely relay of critical information to their governments. Sir Henry Elliot’s contrasting approach raises concerns about a potential misalignment between diplomatic tradition and contemporary expectations.

The Impact on Humanitarian Response

Sir Henry Elliot’s adherence to official channels, while potentially rooted in traditional diplomatic norms, brings forth the critical question of its impact on humanitarian response. As reports of massacres mount, the consequences of diplomatic inertia become increasingly evident. How does a rigid adherence to bureaucracy affect the ability to address crises with the urgency they demand?

Reassessing Diplomatic Priorities in Crisis

The controversy surrounding Sir Henry Elliot prompts a reassessment of diplomatic priorities, especially in the face of humanitarian crises. Balancing the need for official validation with the imperative to respond promptly to credible information emerges as a delicate challenge. As the world grapples with evolving diplomatic norms, the question remains: Should adherence to tradition impede the swift and effective resolution of crises that demand immediate attention?

[goldenhornist]

Sir Henry Elliot's Controversial Stance Amidst Massacre Reports

Sir Henry Elliot’s Response to Massacre Reports

In the wake of the harrowing reports of massacres pouring in from various quarters, a spotlight falls on the actions of Sir Henry Elliot, the British Ambassador. Questions emerge regarding his apparent reluctance to acknowledge the gravity of the situation, raising concerns about the role of diplomacy and official channels in responding to humanitarian crises.

Navigating the Complexity of Information Sources

The controversy surrounding Sir Henry Elliot centers on his refusal to believe and act upon reports of massacres, deeming them unofficial due to their non-affiliation with Turkish authorities. This raises fundamental questions about the duty of a diplomat—should their allegiance to official channels supersede the imperative to act on credible information, regardless of its source?

Dr. Long’s Pleas and the Unheeded Letters

The Rev. Dr. Long, associated with Robert College, presented Sir Henry Elliot with a substantial collection of letters detailing the horrors unfolding in the burnt districts. Astonishingly, the ambassador dismissed this firsthand and trustworthy evidence, contending that it lacked the sanctity of official status. The incident begs the question Bulgaria Private Tours: Should the pursuit of truth and the protection of human lives not transcend bureaucratic formalities?

Redefining Diplomatic Responsiveness

Commonly, diplomats are perceived as conduits of vital information, irrespective of its origin, if it serves the greater good. Sir Henry Elliot’s adherence to a rigid definition of “official information” challenges the conventional understanding of diplomatic duties. In times of crisis, is there not a moral obligation to act promptly based on credible reports, even if they lack official endorsement?

Popular Perceptions vs. Sir Henry Elliot’s Approach

Public opinion often favors the utilization of unofficial and private information, especially when dealing with urgent matters. The prevailing sentiment suggests that ambassadors should prioritize the timely relay of critical information to their governments. Sir Henry Elliot’s contrasting approach raises concerns about a potential misalignment between diplomatic tradition and contemporary expectations.

The Impact on Humanitarian Response

Sir Henry Elliot’s adherence to official channels, while potentially rooted in traditional diplomatic norms, brings forth the critical question of its impact on humanitarian response. As reports of massacres mount, the consequences of diplomatic inertia become increasingly evident. How does a rigid adherence to bureaucracy affect the ability to address crises with the urgency they demand?

Reassessing Diplomatic Priorities in Crisis

The controversy surrounding Sir Henry Elliot prompts a reassessment of diplomatic priorities, especially in the face of humanitarian crises. Balancing the need for official validation with the imperative to respond promptly to credible information emerges as a delicate challenge. As the world grapples with evolving diplomatic norms, the question remains: Should adherence to tradition impede the swift and effective resolution of crises that demand immediate attention?

[privateistanbultour]

Sir Henry Elliot's Controversial Stance Amidst Massacre Reports

Sir Henry Elliot’s Response to Massacre Reports

In the wake of the harrowing reports of massacres pouring in from various quarters, a spotlight falls on the actions of Sir Henry Elliot, the British Ambassador. Questions emerge regarding his apparent reluctance to acknowledge the gravity of the situation, raising concerns about the role of diplomacy and official channels in responding to humanitarian crises.

Navigating the Complexity of Information Sources

The controversy surrounding Sir Henry Elliot centers on his refusal to believe and act upon reports of massacres, deeming them unofficial due to their non-affiliation with Turkish authorities. This raises fundamental questions about the duty of a diplomat—should their allegiance to official channels supersede the imperative to act on credible information, regardless of its source?

Dr. Long’s Pleas and the Unheeded Letters

The Rev. Dr. Long, associated with Robert College, presented Sir Henry Elliot with a substantial collection of letters detailing the horrors unfolding in the burnt districts. Astonishingly, the ambassador dismissed this firsthand and trustworthy evidence, contending that it lacked the sanctity of official status. The incident begs the question Bulgaria Private Tours: Should the pursuit of truth and the protection of human lives not transcend bureaucratic formalities?

Redefining Diplomatic Responsiveness

Commonly, diplomats are perceived as conduits of vital information, irrespective of its origin, if it serves the greater good. Sir Henry Elliot’s adherence to a rigid definition of “official information” challenges the conventional understanding of diplomatic duties. In times of crisis, is there not a moral obligation to act promptly based on credible reports, even if they lack official endorsement?

Popular Perceptions vs. Sir Henry Elliot’s Approach

Public opinion often favors the utilization of unofficial and private information, especially when dealing with urgent matters. The prevailing sentiment suggests that ambassadors should prioritize the timely relay of critical information to their governments. Sir Henry Elliot’s contrasting approach raises concerns about a potential misalignment between diplomatic tradition and contemporary expectations.

The Impact on Humanitarian Response

Sir Henry Elliot’s adherence to official channels, while potentially rooted in traditional diplomatic norms, brings forth the critical question of its impact on humanitarian response. As reports of massacres mount, the consequences of diplomatic inertia become increasingly evident. How does a rigid adherence to bureaucracy affect the ability to address crises with the urgency they demand?

Reassessing Diplomatic Priorities in Crisis

The controversy surrounding Sir Henry Elliot prompts a reassessment of diplomatic priorities, especially in the face of humanitarian crises. Balancing the need for official validation with the imperative to respond promptly to credible information emerges as a delicate challenge. As the world grapples with evolving diplomatic norms, the question remains: Should adherence to tradition impede the swift and effective resolution of crises that demand immediate attention?

[happysofiaa]

Sir Henry Elliot's Controversial Stance Amidst Massacre Reports

Sir Henry Elliot’s Response to Massacre Reports

In the wake of the harrowing reports of massacres pouring in from various quarters, a spotlight falls on the actions of Sir Henry Elliot, the British Ambassador. Questions emerge regarding his apparent reluctance to acknowledge the gravity of the situation, raising concerns about the role of diplomacy and official channels in responding to humanitarian crises.

Navigating the Complexity of Information Sources

The controversy surrounding Sir Henry Elliot centers on his refusal to believe and act upon reports of massacres, deeming them unofficial due to their non-affiliation with Turkish authorities. This raises fundamental questions about the duty of a diplomat—should their allegiance to official channels supersede the imperative to act on credible information, regardless of its source?

Dr. Long’s Pleas and the Unheeded Letters

The Rev. Dr. Long, associated with Robert College, presented Sir Henry Elliot with a substantial collection of letters detailing the horrors unfolding in the burnt districts. Astonishingly, the ambassador dismissed this firsthand and trustworthy evidence, contending that it lacked the sanctity of official status. The incident begs the question Bulgaria Private Tours: Should the pursuit of truth and the protection of human lives not transcend bureaucratic formalities?

Redefining Diplomatic Responsiveness

Commonly, diplomats are perceived as conduits of vital information, irrespective of its origin, if it serves the greater good. Sir Henry Elliot’s adherence to a rigid definition of “official information” challenges the conventional understanding of diplomatic duties. In times of crisis, is there not a moral obligation to act promptly based on credible reports, even if they lack official endorsement?

Popular Perceptions vs. Sir Henry Elliot’s Approach

Public opinion often favors the utilization of unofficial and private information, especially when dealing with urgent matters. The prevailing sentiment suggests that ambassadors should prioritize the timely relay of critical information to their governments. Sir Henry Elliot’s contrasting approach raises concerns about a potential misalignment between diplomatic tradition and contemporary expectations.

The Impact on Humanitarian Response

Sir Henry Elliot’s adherence to official channels, while potentially rooted in traditional diplomatic norms, brings forth the critical question of its impact on humanitarian response. As reports of massacres mount, the consequences of diplomatic inertia become increasingly evident. How does a rigid adherence to bureaucracy affect the ability to address crises with the urgency they demand?

Reassessing Diplomatic Priorities in Crisis

The controversy surrounding Sir Henry Elliot prompts a reassessment of diplomatic priorities, especially in the face of humanitarian crises. Balancing the need for official validation with the imperative to respond promptly to credible information emerges as a delicate challenge. As the world grapples with evolving diplomatic norms, the question remains: Should adherence to tradition impede the swift and effective resolution of crises that demand immediate attention?

[istanbulmarket]

Sir Henry Elliot's Controversial Stance Amidst Massacre Reports

Sir Henry Elliot’s Response to Massacre Reports

In the wake of the harrowing reports of massacres pouring in from various quarters, a spotlight falls on the actions of Sir Henry Elliot, the British Ambassador. Questions emerge regarding his apparent reluctance to acknowledge the gravity of the situation, raising concerns about the role of diplomacy and official channels in responding to humanitarian crises.

Navigating the Complexity of Information Sources

The controversy surrounding Sir Henry Elliot centers on his refusal to believe and act upon reports of massacres, deeming them unofficial due to their non-affiliation with Turkish authorities. This raises fundamental questions about the duty of a diplomat—should their allegiance to official channels supersede the imperative to act on credible information, regardless of its source?

Dr. Long’s Pleas and the Unheeded Letters

The Rev. Dr. Long, associated with Robert College, presented Sir Henry Elliot with a substantial collection of letters detailing the horrors unfolding in the burnt districts. Astonishingly, the ambassador dismissed this firsthand and trustworthy evidence, contending that it lacked the sanctity of official status. The incident begs the question Bulgaria Private Tours: Should the pursuit of truth and the protection of human lives not transcend bureaucratic formalities?

Redefining Diplomatic Responsiveness

Commonly, diplomats are perceived as conduits of vital information, irrespective of its origin, if it serves the greater good. Sir Henry Elliot’s adherence to a rigid definition of “official information” challenges the conventional understanding of diplomatic duties. In times of crisis, is there not a moral obligation to act promptly based on credible reports, even if they lack official endorsement?

Popular Perceptions vs. Sir Henry Elliot’s Approach

Public opinion often favors the utilization of unofficial and private information, especially when dealing with urgent matters. The prevailing sentiment suggests that ambassadors should prioritize the timely relay of critical information to their governments. Sir Henry Elliot’s contrasting approach raises concerns about a potential misalignment between diplomatic tradition and contemporary expectations.

The Impact on Humanitarian Response

Sir Henry Elliot’s adherence to official channels, while potentially rooted in traditional diplomatic norms, brings forth the critical question of its impact on humanitarian response. As reports of massacres mount, the consequences of diplomatic inertia become increasingly evident. How does a rigid adherence to bureaucracy affect the ability to address crises with the urgency they demand?

Reassessing Diplomatic Priorities in Crisis

The controversy surrounding Sir Henry Elliot prompts a reassessment of diplomatic priorities, especially in the face of humanitarian crises. Balancing the need for official validation with the imperative to respond promptly to credible information emerges as a delicate challenge. As the world grapples with evolving diplomatic norms, the question remains: Should adherence to tradition impede the swift and effective resolution of crises that demand immediate attention?

[ottomanistanbul]

New Post has been published on Tereza

Sir Henry Elliot's Controversial Stance Amidst Massacre Reports

Sir Henry Elliot’s Response to Massacre Reports

In the wake of the harrowing reports of massacres pouring in from various quarters, a spotlight falls on the actions of Sir Henry Elliot, the British Ambassador. Questions emerge regarding his apparent reluctance to acknowledge the gravity of the situation, raising concerns about the role of diplomacy and official channels in responding to humanitarian crises.

Navigating the Complexity of Information Sources

The controversy surrounding Sir Henry Elliot centers on his refusal to believe and act upon reports of massacres, deeming them unofficial due to their non-affiliation with Turkish authorities. This raises fundamental questions about the duty of a diplomat—should their allegiance to official channels supersede the imperative to act on credible information, regardless of its source?

Dr. Long’s Pleas and the Unheeded Letters

The Rev. Dr. Long, associated with Robert College, presented Sir Henry Elliot with a substantial collection of letters detailing the horrors unfolding in the burnt districts. Astonishingly, the ambassador dismissed this firsthand and trustworthy evidence, contending that it lacked the sanctity of official status. The incident begs the question Bulgaria Private Tours: Should the pursuit of truth and the protection of human lives not transcend bureaucratic formalities?

Redefining Diplomatic Responsiveness

Commonly, diplomats are perceived as conduits of vital information, irrespective of its origin, if it serves the greater good. Sir Henry Elliot’s adherence to a rigid definition of “official information” challenges the conventional understanding of diplomatic duties. In times of crisis, is there not a moral obligation to act promptly based on credible reports, even if they lack official endorsement?

Popular Perceptions vs. Sir Henry Elliot’s Approach

Public opinion often favors the utilization of unofficial and private information, especially when dealing with urgent matters. The prevailing sentiment suggests that ambassadors should prioritize the timely relay of critical information to their governments. Sir Henry Elliot’s contrasting approach raises concerns about a potential misalignment between diplomatic tradition and contemporary expectations.

The Impact on Humanitarian Response

Sir Henry Elliot’s adherence to official channels, while potentially rooted in traditional diplomatic norms, brings forth the critical question of its impact on humanitarian response. As reports of massacres mount, the consequences of diplomatic inertia become increasingly evident. How does a rigid adherence to bureaucracy affect the ability to address crises with the urgency they demand?

Reassessing Diplomatic Priorities in Crisis

The controversy surrounding Sir Henry Elliot prompts a reassessment of diplomatic priorities, especially in the face of humanitarian crises. Balancing the need for official validation with the imperative to respond promptly to credible information emerges as a delicate challenge. As the world grapples with evolving diplomatic norms, the question remains: Should adherence to tradition impede the swift and effective resolution of crises that demand immediate attention?

[lookingistanbul]

Sir Henry Elliot's Controversial Stance Amidst Massacre Reports

Sir Henry Elliot’s Response to Massacre Reports

In the wake of the harrowing reports of massacres pouring in from various quarters, a spotlight falls on the actions of Sir Henry Elliot, the British Ambassador. Questions emerge regarding his apparent reluctance to acknowledge the gravity of the situation, raising concerns about the role of diplomacy and official channels in responding to humanitarian crises.

Navigating the Complexity of Information Sources

The controversy surrounding Sir Henry Elliot centers on his refusal to believe and act upon reports of massacres, deeming them unofficial due to their non-affiliation with Turkish authorities. This raises fundamental questions about the duty of a diplomat—should their allegiance to official channels supersede the imperative to act on credible information, regardless of its source?

Dr. Long’s Pleas and the Unheeded Letters

The Rev. Dr. Long, associated with Robert College, presented Sir Henry Elliot with a substantial collection of letters detailing the horrors unfolding in the burnt districts. Astonishingly, the ambassador dismissed this firsthand and trustworthy evidence, contending that it lacked the sanctity of official status. The incident begs the question Bulgaria Private Tours: Should the pursuit of truth and the protection of human lives not transcend bureaucratic formalities?

Redefining Diplomatic Responsiveness

Commonly, diplomats are perceived as conduits of vital information, irrespective of its origin, if it serves the greater good. Sir Henry Elliot’s adherence to a rigid definition of “official information” challenges the conventional understanding of diplomatic duties. In times of crisis, is there not a moral obligation to act promptly based on credible reports, even if they lack official endorsement?

Popular Perceptions vs. Sir Henry Elliot’s Approach

Public opinion often favors the utilization of unofficial and private information, especially when dealing with urgent matters. The prevailing sentiment suggests that ambassadors should prioritize the timely relay of critical information to their governments. Sir Henry Elliot’s contrasting approach raises concerns about a potential misalignment between diplomatic tradition and contemporary expectations.

The Impact on Humanitarian Response

Sir Henry Elliot’s adherence to official channels, while potentially rooted in traditional diplomatic norms, brings forth the critical question of its impact on humanitarian response. As reports of massacres mount, the consequences of diplomatic inertia become increasingly evident. How does a rigid adherence to bureaucracy affect the ability to address crises with the urgency they demand?

Reassessing Diplomatic Priorities in Crisis

The controversy surrounding Sir Henry Elliot prompts a reassessment of diplomatic priorities, especially in the face of humanitarian crises. Balancing the need for official validation with the imperative to respond promptly to credible information emerges as a delicate challenge. As the world grapples with evolving diplomatic norms, the question remains: Should adherence to tradition impede the swift and effective resolution of crises that demand immediate attention?

[gosingcoblogs]

Forging Informed Peacemakers: The Vital Role of International Humanitarian Law and Peace Studies in Political Science Major students.

In the domain of Political Science, where the intricate webs of power, policy, and global dynamics are untangled, a pair of disciplines hold immense significance: International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and Peace Studies. While some might wonder why these aspects are necessary for a poli-sci major, the interconnectedness of politics, law, and peace becomes evident upon closer examination. In today's world, the presence of wars is still not a horrible thing that only happened in the distant past. Where people, civilians and eventual non-combatants, whose fundamental human rights are continuously being infringed upon by tyrannical people in power in places of conflict in the world. The significance and the urgency of the people who study, give advice, and guide people in power is becoming evident.

These fields may be pretty extraneous for political science students who only think politics is about government and power. Although some might wonder why the connection is not immediately apparent, embarking on this journey of understanding these topics will not only enrich the understanding of the reality of the world of a Polsci major student. But also foster a deep understanding of global dynamics and human behavior. This blog post will enable us to journey in understanding the nexus and the vital role of IHL and Peace studies in helping to enhance the lens as well as an understanding of a Political Science major student and the challenges IHL and Peace studies face in contemporary work.

First, we must understand what IHL and Peace studies even mean.

IHL serves as a moral compass and legal framework in times of conflict, dictating the rules of engagement, protecting the vulnerable, and limiting the horrors of war. The broad area of peace studies emphasizes social justice, sustainable peacebuilding, conflict transformation, and the mere absence of violence. IHL and peace studies are helpful to a Political Science major student as they provide a student with certain specific values, such as:

Interconnectedness of Objectives of the Three Aspects:

Through diplomacy and negotiation, politics frequently aims to gain control and influence. On the other hand, the absence of violence and the creation of a peaceful society are the goals of peace. IHL ties these goals together by establishing legal frameworks that regulate conflicts and guarantee that advancing political agendas does not jeopardize human rights and moral principles.

A Humanistic Approach to Diplomacy

Diplomacy is the leading player where politics and peace are intertwined. IHL serves as a pillar, requiring that agreements prioritize the protection of civilians and abide by humanitarian norms. This convergence compels policymakers to engage in diplomacy that puts human lives on par with political objectives.

However, we should also look at some challenges in studying IHL and world peace.

Ethical Dilemmas in weighing variables.

Complex ethical conundrums are frequently presented in the study of peace and IHL. A careful line must be drawn between granting amnesties for the benefit of stability and securing justice for victims to strike a balance between the pursuit of peace and accountability for crimes.

Power Imbalance and Lack of Political Motivation

Politics, IHL, and peace are all inextricably linked to power relations. Practical peacebuilding efforts might be hampered by uneven treatment on the international stage due to powerful governments bending the implementation of IHL to suit their interests. It needs political will on a national and international level to implement IHL and pursue peace. However, the commitment to preserving humanitarian values and prioritizing peace might need to be improved by competing interests and political agendas.