#how much involvement do you have to feel from a story from a person in order to START thinking deeper on them let alone like or act/help

[raven-at-the-writing-desk]

I interpreted the "adaptation from the manga" thing to imply that they'll animate the 3 Yuus (like you said) but my partner proposed smth to me that raised my concerns... what if they only animate Yuuka? or like- default to a female Yuu? I could see that bc it would be probably easier for them to have only one protagonist.

don't get me wrong I like Yuuka and I know a lot of TWST fans are women but since the studio involved is apparently known for shojos I'm scared they'll make it seem like the story is romantic/the game is an otome... Which I mean- we do have SOME fanservice stuff but it's definitely not a romance story. That's why I'm scared 😭 if they do go that path... I much rather prefer the disconnection (?) of having 3 different Yuus than the possibility of this...

Also I'm just 🥲 I'm scared ppl will see that and say ahhh So Yuu has always been a woman!! Because as a trans guy, one thing that rlly made me feel valid in a way was seeing that in the game Yuu has no gender at all... I don't go by they/them but I'd much rather be referred as that than to be misgendered. It's a small thing but it's such an important detail for me (the fact that Yuu is gender neutral/can be whatever u want them to be) that it being erased in the anime would make me pretty sad... even more if ppl take the anime as "confirmation" of Yuu's gender, which it wouldn't be regardless if they end up giving us a girl OR guy Yuu- it would just be another Yuu interpretation different from the game.

But yeah, personal stuff aside, I'm more scared by the possibility of them making it seem like it's a romance story 😭 or ppl calling TWST an otome... which I mean... some people already have that misconception, even some fans...

[Referencing this post and this news!]

I definitely think they're probably leaning towards a new Yuu every season; otherwise, there would be a very uneven distribution of screen time for one Yuu over the others, and that leads into the problem of one Yuu being "more" canon than the rest. Yes, it will probably be easier logistically speaking to keep the same Yuu for the entire anime--but I also said the same thing when we only had the Episode of Heartslabyul manga, and look what happened with that. We ended up getting Yuuka and Yuuta following Yuuken, regardless of the logistical inconvenience of it all. I think if the anime intended to have a singular Yuu to follow for the main story, they would have chosen to adapt the light novel (which has Yuuya across multiple volumes) instead of the manga. The conscious decision to adapt the manga (with changing Yuus) says something to me. So really, I don't think we have to worry about one "kind" of Yuu dominating the anime. I took a look at the portfolios of the two studios collaborating for the Twst anime and didn't see a ton of shoujo myself. There was definitely a handful of them, but overall there was a spread of genres. I think Yumeta Company (one of the studios) has Tokyo Mew Mew New under its belt, which is probably one of its better-known works and maybe that's where the "they're known for doing shoujo" allegations are coming from? Don't quote me on that, though. I'm not someone who closely follows anime studios.

I would, however, like to point out that we shouldn't put all our stock into the studios behind the anime. Yes, they are obviously animating the project and thus have an influence on how the final product is. However, there are tons of other people involved (like the script writer) that will dictate how the anime looks and feels. (In fact, the script writer for the Twst anime, Kato Yoichi, is not known for writing shoujo.) I highly doubt all the staff involved at every possible level of production are conspiring to make Twst a genre it's not. (Related: I blame socialization for this, but it's a little sad that most of us by default think one woman + a bunch of men in a cast must be romantic.)

Now, to your main point. I understand the initial fear of people misunderstanding Twst as a dating sim/otome from how it is presented. Really, I do. I also understand the frustration that comes with people claiming Yuu's identity or gender or what have you is "confirmed". But to that, I ask you: so what? And I don't mean that in a "your feelings aren't valid" way (because your feelings are very valid!) I mean in like... Do these misconceptions others have truly impact your own enjoyment? Do the people believing in these falsehoods erase what you know is the truth? I would wager it doesn't. There has been and always will be those who see Twst or interpret Yuu as something they are not. Lots of us (myself included) thought Twst was an otome game when they first heard of its concept. People claimed Yuuken was the definitive Yuu when the first chapter of the manga dropped. That's fandom, especially the larger they get. If we fixate on those sore spots, it will ultimately make us unhappy because there will never be an end to misunderstandings. I would advise that you try and detach from those worries and just focus on having your own fun in the fandom rather than worrying about how others are consuming or reacting to Twst. Yes, we want Twst, a franchise we've seriously been invested in and love, to be seen a certain way--but I don't think that should come at the cost of your enjoyment. Fandom is meant to be fun, and we don't want to make ourselves miserable by stressing over the "what ifs", you know? Please focus on yourself!!

[lilithofpenandbook]

Out of everything that traumatised Neville, Snape isn't one of them. If he is, that's not because Snape is abusive, it's because Neville is literally weak. That's not an insult, that's his flaw- being unnecessarily scared of everything. The other children are not afraid of Snape himself. They're more afraid of the consequences of angering Snape (house points lost, detentions, scoldings) rather than Snape as a person.

Neville's feelings are shockingly enough, not valid. Those feelings of fear, that cowardice? A flaw. Just as much as arrogance, spitefulness, being overly afraid is a flaw and in his case makes him a danger to others, as does his clumsiness and forgetfulness. Now, forgetfulness isn't something you can choose, I'd call it a weakness more than a flaw, but at the same time there are ways to manage it. But the cowardice? That's a flaw that needs to be corrected.

Neville's trauma comes from his family. His uncle is awful to him, as is his grandmother, and seeing his parents in such a state is enough to mess anyone up. He comes from a messed up family. It does not come from Snape.

People also like to say that "Oh look his boggart is Snape even though his parents were tortured!!!" but here's the thing: Neville was probably never even present.

He probably never ever even saw his parents tortured. He knows what happened, but was most likely never a witness. If he was present would he have actually lived? Of course not. So of course he's not going to have that as his worst fear. It's not going to come to mind in school. Not when he just got grilled by Snape.

Neville's been through traumatic events, that's undeniable. But Snape is not one of them. Snape isn't obliged to be nice to Neville. Snape's job when it's Neville is, by some point, just making sure Longbottom doesn't kill them all. Neville's cowardice and clumsiness aren't reasons to coddle him. If I was teaching Potions, I'd have kicked Neville out by second year- no way am I risking a whole class because one child can't follow basic instructions.

Neville's family is the real problem in Neville's story. They're supposed to look after him and care for him. If we're going to be talking about this boy's trauma, we need to discuss how he was more alarmed at the thought of his grandmother being his boggart than Snape was to the point that he didn't mention her, Lupin just mentioned her to give Neville an idea of how to sort out the boggart

And let's also talk about why Lupin decided to essentially completely humiliate a colleague that is already not respected by the children. Making his likeness look ridiculous is so petty and unprofessional. Lupin could have easily told Neville to do literally anything else that would have made the situation funny without making a mockery of Snape, but he didn't. He chose to suggest the grandmother's clothes to humiliate the real Snape- look at what happened at Christmas when Snape got that hat from his cracker, he was clearly upset by it, he clearly knew why the boys were laughing-and not only that, he prompted Neville through the entire thing. He didn't simply say "imagine Snape in your grandmother's clothes", he dragged out the entire thing to make it as ludicrous as possible (like, why the handbag? Why did he prompt Neville to also describe her handbag? Obviously to add to the ridiculousness). That's his colleague. He's leading the kids to disrespect his colleague, their teacher. When you read that scene, it's fairly obvious Snape was likely to be Neville's boggart due to him literally making a remark that embarrassed Neville seconds prior that Neville visibly reacted to (and in all honesty, it was a fair warning. Sarcastic, but fair- Neville should not be entrusted with anything dangerous and DADA involves doing things that could hurt others). If you want to talk about the boggart scene, acknowledge how Lupin had a full conversation with Neville to prompt him to imagine something to humiliate Snape with. "Oh, it's just a boggart" But it's not. Something like that is going to be spread, gossiped about, it will ruin whatever little respect the kids have for Snape. Lupin was behaving absolutely unprofessionally and honestly when I looked at it just now, it made me feel a little sick the way Lupin was talking.

And I'm not even going to discuss Trevor The Toad, I've already gone on about him multiple times before. It's probably the most misunderstood and misused scene against Snape. Like, it only takes two seconds to realise that if Snape's intention was to hurt or kill Trevor, he would have just squished Trevor when Trevor was reduced into a tadpole (was it a tadpole?). As it was, he didn't even leave Trevor as a tadpole and make Neville make the counter-potion, he administered it himself and was specifically mad that Hermione helped Neville after being told not to. Once again, Snape's not being abusive or a bully for the sake of it- he's trying to be a teacher. It's the kind of thing you hate as a child but grow up to realise that actually, the adult had a point. Even if it seemed unfair at that moment.

Anyway, people geniunely don't give a shit about Neville's trauma, and when they do, it's to use it against Snape without acknowledging that actually, it's far worse that his Boggart could have easily been his grandmother but Lupin didn't allow it (he didn't even question why he was so afraid of her). It's far worse that his uncle treated him so badly. It's far worse that the people who were supposed to raise Neville were cruel to him. And it's far worse that McGonagall, who IS supposed to care for Neville, is just as mean to him as Snape is.

The fact that people (Marauders Stans) only care about Neville's trauma to bash Snape. It's always Snape was his boggart never McGonagall risked him dying twice and humiliated him in front of everyone. Or his grandma treated him like shit and his great uncle nearly killed him several times. They literally don't care about Neville. It's Snape fans who actually care more about him (even if they don't care about him) because they don't treat him/his trauma like a tool (which is a very low bar). I feel really sorry for him. After everything he went through, his trauma is not talked about enough.

[generalluxun]

I'm still trying to get my head around Chat Noir's complete sidelining not just in the finale, but pretty much the entirety of the show. Based on some of the tweets I've seen, Thomas Astruc is pretty hostile to the suggestion that Chat should have more of a share of the narrative.

So... why? Why make his family, his very existence, the fulcrum on which the show turns? If you want to be the show to only be about Marinette, with Adrien as a side character and "just" a love interest, then MAKE the show only about Marinette. Don't make the main plot about Adrien, and wonder why people are confused when he's not more involved in the main plot. It's such a self-inflicted wound.

Heck, the least they could have done was give Marinette SOME personal stake in her conflict with Hawkmoth, even if it's as uncomplicated as making Marinette a paragon-type superhero like Superman or Captain American who takes her duty to the people of Paris very seriously and feels deeply about the hurt Hawkmoth's is putting them through. But most of Marinette's personal conflicts are about romance or school dynamics. The closest any of her conflicts come to her actual enmity with Hawkmoth are those that deal with the stress of being a superhero/Guardian, in which Hawkmoth doesn't really feature as a person who is her mortal enemy but as an impersonal cause for the stress she's in.

While the finale tries to summon some emotional weight to Marinette's situation, the final fight, at least on Ladybug's end, feels less like the culmination of an epic rivalry and more like a contractual obligation Marinette needs to meet as Gabriel's assigned nemesis.

I mean, the unsatisfying but true answer is twofold:

1)TA never wanted Ladybug to have a partner. That was a requirement in order to get producers lined up to hand over money. It should be understood that I am NOT trashing the producers for this. It is their money. If you want to pursue your purely artistic goal then you secure other funding or self fund. If you want to get something MADE then you have to make what people want to pay to have made. A portion of the friction here comes from the fact that I don't think TA ever stopped fighting for his original version of the show, and that version conflicts directly with the version he was paid to write for.

2)In the context of the above- Adrien is a TROPHY. Gabriel is the DRAGON, and his home life is the TOWER that the KNIGHT Marinette must rescue him from. If Adrien were a side-character he wouldn't be much of a trophy, investment wise. Is it good to make a character purely a trophy? No. It's not good when it is done ot female characters, it's not good when it's done to male ones either. (Or intersex, enby, nongendered, etc) We've moved past the kind of storytelling TA is selling in his vision of ML. It feels like something out of the early 00's, which when you consider where he started his work, makes a lot of sense.

Should they have connected Marinette to Gabriel more? Absolutely! They both do fashion! SHE could have had an internship right along with Lila. Can you imagine the rivalry there? Can you imagine the conflicts with Gabriel?

At the VERY least they should have let Marinette actually track down abriel. Let her put all her planning and analysis to good use! Instead they just had Felix do it all and then some blind luck at the end. That's LAME, that's cheating Marinette out of a well deserved culmination story beat.

Punching has never been what Ladybug was about, so a final fight could never be a satisfying climax no matter how 'epic' it was.

[docholligay]

I have no idea how wild the fandom for Hadestown is. If you don’t know me, if we’ve never exchanged words, and you have BIG FEELINGS about Hadestown that any level of critique will set off, I very much encourage you to move it along. I can’t do Hamilton 2 or whatever. (If I know you I will give you more leeway FOR SURE. I just want to keep strange weirdos out) 

First, I have to provide a little bit of context: I got in on the ground floor with Hadestown. 

Yes Doc, I too, have been obsessed with it ever since it was in previews--no, I mean, i saw folk singer Anais Mitchell perform the whole thing like 15 years or whatever ago in a converted garage venue. 

I wasn’t even in town to SEE HER, I was in town to see a different artist and this was back when live music was a bigger thing and not a dying scene, and people just bought tickets to whatever was playing on a free night. I like folk music, I liked the idea of what was then being called a folk opera. It was instant love. Orpheus and Eurydice is one of my favorite myths, I am from a rural and exploited place, I loved everything I heard, some absolutely glorious poetry going on there. Bought the concept album, forced so so many people to listen to it all the way through. Forced jetty to listen to it on our road trip! Before the musical came out even!

I have been following this musical ever since then. I kind of thought it would never get made! I followed the original version, and then the broadway one. What I’m saying is, I have what now amounts to about fifteen or so years of history with this musical, and all the changes it has gone through, and all my individual feelings about each of those changes. My evaluation necessarily lives within that context. 

This was part of the reason it took me so long to see the Broadway! I wanted the emotional space to feel however I felt about it, even if that ended up being, “I fucking hated that” and it’s hard to have that when someone buys very expensive tickets and a trip for you to see something you’ve been following for years. Part of jetty’s gift of this was “And you can hate it!!” and I knew she meant it, because when you watch something move and be workshopped and change, you get a lot of feelings about it. 

So I can’t really go, “I liked Hadestown/I didn’t” I mean, I have loved hadestown for a very long time. If all you wanted to hear was , ‘Did you like it?” oh yes! But I have at least four versions sitting my head right now, and they are all next to each other for evaluation in a way that someone who has only experienced the broadway can’t have. 

I want to provide this knowledge because my thoughts about it go so far beyond what is currently being staged on Broadway. No, this is not going to be me saying, ‘Everything was better with the concept album!” no, some things are, but this isn’t that I promise. 

Everything below this is spoilery

So, originally Hadestown was a slightly different story and admittedly, one that spoke to me more than the story I saw last night. It was a lot more specific in its earliest days--it was about an impoverished mining town. Hadestown was the company town, underground, and there was basically no mention of Hades and Persephone being actual gods, anything was winked to, but it was mostly about how the holders of capital have all the accountability of gods. The whole thing had a much stronger anti-capitalist framework, and Orpheus and Eurydice were basically naive kids who thought they could avoid involvement with the mine. Obviously, this very much spoke to me. It was matching my freak exactly. 

It is not that now. And that’s both totally expected, and disappointing to me personally. The show now is much more of a, I’m trying to put this in a way that feels less insulting because I don’t mean to be, very Captial L Liberal. Audiences who can afford Broadway tickets will eat up the vague notions of wishing for a better tomorrow and ‘show the way the world could be’ and putting this back into the framework of a story of the gods instead of the utter lack of choices available to people, that the game is rigged from the start, and Orpheus even having this chance is both an exception and a test hades expects him to fail. I get why this happens. Literally every story that has ever been brought to Broadway has had to be made more palatable to a broader audience. The story it is now, is much much more broad, much more life affirming or whatever, and much more easy to hear. I think I would like it better if I didn’t know the story from the very first versions. 

But that was not a problem last night! That was a problem when i heard the previews out of Alberta! So I’ve had years to adjust to knowing that they were going to blame Orpheus a lot more. Which I love that the Broadway seems to have backed off of! The Alberta production really sort of LAID INTO THE BOY in a way I aggressively did not care for, because it was the antithesis of the story as I understood it. Love that they took that back a step. 

Anyway, so, things I loved about the musical last night:

The staging of Wait For Me fucked SO SEVERELY that honestly it makes me forgive like 90% of the things I don’t care for in the final Broadway version, that I thought were done better in other versions. I almost cried, it was EXACTLY what I would have pictured in my head after hearing it all those years ago. It was incredible. I wish I could see it again, and study it. I am thinking about it right now! It will live rent free in my head. Perfect. 

The gal who played Eurydice has clearly listened to Anais Mitchell albums, because she sounded SO MUCH like Anais that it even took me back for a moment. 

I’m not sure if this is praise or a criticism: 

I don’t know how I feel about having Hermes as an overall narrator! I go back and forth on it and have since the Alberta came out. If I were going to do it I would do it differently than it is currently staged. Jetty was talking about how she loves when the instrumentals are onstage, and I’m the exact opposite--I mostly find it crowds the stage while not bringing much interest for me. But in general, i both like it and do not like it, to give a very useful critique. I don’t hate it, for sure. I love the opener for Wait For Me II. But overall I will probably need to think about it for another 15 years. 

Frustrations I have:

 I think I have decided that even for the MASSIVE INSANE BUCKWILD flaw of seemingly blaming Orpheus for Eurydice’s decision, the Alberta is the best version. I think I prefer the concept album on a personal level for a lot of things, but I think the Alberta is, well for starters, definitely more complete--the concept album has some massive gaps in it that desperately needed filling--but it preserved a lot of the poetry that the Broadway version seems to have stripped out while being much more mass appealing. I was particularly GALLED by the rewrite of Epic III, one of the things in the Alberta version that made me say, ‘Wow I am prepared to forgive a lot of horseshit for this song, my god” 

NEVER FORGET WHAT THEY TOOK FROM YOU

They took out "The heart of a king who loves everything like the hammer loves the nail" imagine writing that line and scrapping it, are you HIGH, fuck me running.

And I think this summarizes a lot of my frustrations about the changes between the Alberta and the Broadway. It no longer sounds like a folk opera. It has lost a lot of the poetry of the original, folk music being very grounded in lyric and somewhat less in vocal theatrics. 

Also, and this might just be an actors thing, I did not get any sense that Persephone and Hades love each other…at all. Part of the appeal for human beings named Doc who are me is that they love each other, and they can’t stand each other, and I didn’t FEEL that at all. Like i said this could be an acting thing--I was not overly impressed by our persephone broadly. But taking out her part in Chant II I think also really contributes to this problem. 

This is both the Alberta and Broadway versions: I MISS THE FATES BEING A REALLY TIGHT 40s STYLE GIRL GROUP SOB SOB SOB. In the original, the fates were the only characters ‘outside’ the story, and this was indicated stylistically by the fact that everyone else was singing folk music, and they were singing in this very different style. The idea fifteen years ago was that they actually would be dressed all in that style, but yeah, none of this happens now and i find it SOOOOOO disappointing personally. I hate their stupid costumes I hate the ‘rougher’ style of vocals I hate it so much ahahahahha. If I was going to force Anais to change one thing it would actually be this, even though it is insanely petty and silly. 

The best version of when the chips are down:

I don’t know if literally any of this is what you were looking for but I somehow deeply suspect not. I am IN THE SHIT with Hadestown though, so if you have any specific things you wanted to ask about or have me talk about, let me know! I am just cutting this off now because it’s already at 1700 words and I’m not sure anyone cares that much about my journey with the only musical I can truly say I knew about when it was still a twinkle in someone’s eye. 

(Yeah Doc, I have a question: Do you have anything mean to say about the concept album? OH BOY DO I. Some of it is to be expected like, "Uh, Anais you need the rest of the story here girl." but a huge one is I fucking HATE that she got Justin Vernon, who you know better as Bon Iver, to do Orpheus. He SUCKS. He sounds bored the whole time because that is how that motherfucker sings. I have HATED it since day one. Reeve Carney is perfect and literally what I started my local women's prayer and casserole circle to petition the Lord for.)

[bmpmp3]

everyone on earth probably has a hypothetical farming sim in their mind's eye that they daydream about on occasion because of the unfortunate situation that despite there being like a thousand farming games released every minute only like 4 of them are any good. and i think this is fun, i think its good to keep the imagination alive. if i made a farming sim i would bring back rival marriages from the old friends of mineral town. i want to steal someones wife.

[murfpersonalblog]

Sincerely, thank you SO much for all of the input you (and @alleyskywalker) have been giving me; talking to y'all has really raised a lot of excellent points that I hadn't considered. I'm definitely doing a revised Trial Timeline Pt2d, to make a few changes based on everything we've discussed together.

Sam's presence by Armand's side

"When Daniel points out the inconsistency of the memory of Sam’s role in the trial, Louis experiences cognitive dissonance, because Armand has told him and most likely wants to believe that his companion of 77 years was also a victim. To resolve this dissonance, Louis ends up blaming himself by saying he’s the one remembering things wrong."

Yes, y'all have convinced me that Sam was probably NOT a fake memory from Armand or a hallucination from Louis' thoughts. Sam was just moving back & forth b/t Armand's box to watch the Trial play out, and the Wet Room to torture Louis.

Which is a theory I really like, cuz it makes Louis' excuse that he never went after Sam cuz "time heals all wounds" seem even more sus, cuz this is the man largely in charge of writing the play & all of the horrible things about you & Claudia. You killed the frikkin musicians, but not the actual writer?????

Same with when people point out Louis' strange personality changes b/t 2x4 & 2x5, how he's mad one second and hearteyes the next, like...?

So I'm VERY excited to get Sam in S3, cuz he's got SO MUCH explaining to do.

Coup & Script

From the show, Santiago went to Louis’ apartment to find evidence they could nail him on. Before that, they didn’t really have anything to put Louis on trial: the maitre had given him dispensation from joining the coven; he’s not the one who turned a child. They could kill Claudia based on her being ‘deformed’ alone, and I think until Santiago knew about their killing of Lestat, that was the plan. So can we assume that Sam started writing the play in April 1949, but it was a meatless play, which is why Santiago went looking for something and ended up finding Claudia’s diaries in June/July, a time when Armand was heavily distracted because Louis had committed to a companionship with him. 

No wait, Santiago went looking for the diaries in late 1947/early 1948, way before Sam wrote the Trial script in 1949 (AND Godot). Sam already knew they'd tried to kill Les in 1949, he already had the diaries by then.

But it was still a meatless play, agreed, cuz they wanted LESTAT'S testimony. Which is why we then get Roget's interrogation in 1948ish, and them climbing the Eiffel Tower in 1949--they wanted the drama of Lestat being on the stage, "swearing on his own blood" that "his" version of (scripted) events was true. Cuz they're vicious; it twists the knife to have Les' testimony be the thing that condemns them.

Maybe what we saw of Celeste and Estelle's conversation on the bridge was one of those times the audience got a rare objective reconstruction of events. But since Louis is the one doing the retelling at this point of the story, let's assume he was privy to their conversation, and that Santiago’s insistence that he was Maître probably convinced him that Armand was telling the truth about his involvement. (I think the show was doing that thing where they’re trying to tell us Armand wasn’t the mastermind behind the whole thing, but it was done so clumsily that it feels out of tune with the tone of the show).

Celeste & Estelle give 2 reasons--the London coven targeting their weakness, or Eglee being mad that Santiago dumped her for Celeste. So yes, their convo speaks to the coven's insecurities about their tenuous loyalties to e/o--no honor amongst thieves, a group's only as strong as their weakest link. Santiago insisted that he was the mastermind of the whole Trial the same way he wanted everyone to follow him as Maitre. Louis was right about him in the park, "He wants your job."

So I have no doubt that it was Santiago's plan from the start--he wanted Louis dead the second Louis fell asleep during Santiago's performance in 2x2 & didn't wanna watch anymore of their plays, "persona non grata." This whole Trial is about Santiago's beef with Louis ever since, and he dragged Claudia, Lestat, AND Armand into this mess. I was shocked that more people blamed Armand for Claudia's death than Santiago, like wtf? He literally said IT WAS ME!

But the juicy question is: WHEN did Armand agree to follow Santiago's schemes? WHEN did Armand start lying REALLY? 🤷

Loumand

Did Armand lie to Louis about Gabrielle and Nicki, or was he lying/not telling stuff to Daniel?

Louis said in 2x3 "He abandoned Nicky. He abandoned Armand. He abandoned the coven. Lestat is, was, and will always be, for Lestat." So Armand has obvs lied by omission TO LOUIS before about Lesmand's past, cuz that is NOT the full truth, as I explained in the post I linked--Sam even says in the article that Rolin deliberately wanted Gabrielle's absence to be a red flag about Armand's unreliable narration.

Which makes me think Armand can’t just snap his fingers and rewire a memory. It’s probably easier when someone is ‘half in love with easeful forgetting’, but even then, a vampire who’s feeding human every other day, as Louis is in Paris, isn’t so easy to memory wipe to the extent of never remembering anything despite interacting with the memory wiper every day compared to a drugged up, drained human who manages to retrieve important memories while dying of a neurodegenerative disease. I guess this is me coming out as the person who believes that Louis asked Armand to erase the memory of him going into the sun (Armand took advantage, of course, and painted himself as a saviour, but I’m convinced the initial decision to erase those memories was Louis’).

Agreed! It could very well have been Louis' decision to ask Armand to wipe his memories.

BUT.

That loops us back to this:

Same thing with the pages he removed from the diary. Louis knew what was in those pages, he’d had access to them for a while, he was okay with them being shown/not shown to Daniel. He also knew that Armand had made the unilateral decision to remove some of the diary pages because he didn’t want Daniel to know certain things about him.

SOME of the pages Armand removed WITHOUT Louis' knowledge and consent/permission, behind Louis' back, "on my own", Armand admits this himself:

Cuz like I've said 1000x times, Armand abused Louis' trust, and took advantage of Louis over & over again, and played him for a fool. YES, Louis ripped pages out (eg: Claudia's rape). And yes, Loumand obvs agreed to the Rashid ruse together, to protect Armand's true identity from Dan cuz of what happened in SanFran.

But the pages Armand removed "on my own" were NOT part of their agreement--Dan would've just read Armand's name & been like WHO? And Louis & "Rashid" would've just been like: Oh, the coven master, move on. Armand didn't cover his tracks well enough--he was sloppy. And revealing himself "this time I won't save your life" blew that whole "Rashid" plan out the water. And ironically, revealing himself was the string that unraveled this whole web of lies. Cuz Dan had his scent at that point, and followed it all the way to Sam & the Talamasca & the rest of Armand's lies.

It ain't a good look, and it casts Louis' agency asking to be mindwiped in SanFran into HIGHKEY question. No mental health expert who works with traumatized neurodivergent victims of abuse would EVER agree that Louis was in the right mind during that time:

fresh off a suicide attempt and STILL burned from it (even when they took Dan to the drug den he's got the burns on him in the Talamasca photos; so Louis wasn't even healed at the time & was still in incredible pain)

AND a mental breakdown (triggered by drugs, Dan's rudeness demanding to be Louis' Lestat, and Armand's deep cuts during their fight)

AND a traumatic phonecall he did NOT ask for (thanks Armand) with the Maker he was told (by Armand) had sentenced him to death in the Trial

So yes, I also believe Louis asked Armand to mindwipe him. But Armand should've never done it, cuz Louis wasn't mentally well to make that kind of decision with full consent, and his anger about it in Dubai strongly indicates that if he HAD been more cognizant, he wouldn'tve wanted it done either.

Again: Armand is well aware that it makes him look better in Louis' mind to have those memories removed--not just that Louis tried to kill himself, but also the entire fight Loumand had--Louis admitting how he was bored to dangit death being with Armand & hated having sex with him; and Armand mocking Paul's suicide (a la SanFran) and Grace burying Louis alive (a la Paris) and Claudia resenting Louis (a la Merrick). Their whole fight was about Louis' deep discontent being with Armand anymore, and by erasing Louis' memories of the fight, it allowed Armand to rewrite history so that Louis never even remembered that he didn't like Armand anymore & that Lou was READY to call it quits with Armand in 1973--even if it killed him.

Which ofc brings us back to the complex self-preserving/self-sabotaging choices Armand makes. Cuz on one hand, he's terrified of being alone, and is not above lies & mindewipes to keep someone with him; but on the other hand, he's also not above throwing them to the wolves like castoffs the second he has better options. Which is KINDA book accurate...but kinda NOT book accurate. Which is my personal beef with AMC!Armand vs book!Armand.

But, we’ve seen Armand distracted and unable to use his powers in Dubai, like when Rashid and Daniel lie to him about what went on in the restaurant, or when Rashid brought Daniel a fat-ass newspaper, or when Daniel was plotting to reveal everything at the table. The only person who used mind reading often in Dubai was Louis, not Armand. Now, maybe it was the show not knowing what to do with Armand since they’d made him too powerful and if he was a Master Plotter, there’s no reason why he wouldn’t be able to see the plotting around him in Dubai. But let’s go with what the show has told us: when in love, Armand fails to see what’s happening around him.  Let’s say he was so in love with Louis, that he not only lost interest in the coven and broke the rules he’d enforced for centuries, but he also deluded himself into believing that other coven members wouldn’t rebel against his selective tyranny.

That's been my deep suspicion since Day 👏 Effing 👏 ONE. 👏 I'm convinced Rolin never intended for Armand to get so popular in the fanbase, and was fully prepared to throw him under the bus with the "Banishment" plot twist & make him the bad guy & look even worse than he was in the books; by helping to plan his own companion's murder, and lie about saving him for 77 years.

Cuz IMO book!Armand is MUCH easier to defend; he's my fave character in TVC, BECAUSE to a large extent he was right: toddler!Claudia was an abomination, she was the ONLY one who stabbed/poisoned Les, Louis was 100% oblivious to her plotting, and Armand never had any intention of killing Louis. The effed up part was killing Madz, who had nothing to do with anything. The whole duplicitous backstabbing aspect of the Trial only pertained to Armand torturing Les to force him to condemn Claudia, and lying to Lou that Les had died after the Trial/fire. Armand was THE most powerful vamp, and Santiago was more in the background. AMC!Armand's actions against Louis are skeevy AF, casting into question how he could be so painfully oblivious, both to Santiago AND Daniel plotting. book!Armand loyally stayed with Louis until Louis was literally too depressed to be around anymore. He never wiped Lou's memory or anything, he just left Lou to his own devices, which was the SMART/BETTER thing to do--regardless of if AMC!Lou asked him to erase the memories or not (post-suicide attempt & mental break; the dubcon is through the ROOF 😩).

I'm in the same position as Lestans who hate AMC!Lestat, cuz I find AMC!Armand SO much worse; I don't like or trust him AT ALL. And I see no logical explanation for AMC changing so much, other than that that's what AMC intended us to feel about him here. 🤷 Only difference is that Loustat's still endgame, so there HAS to be a redemption arc for Lestat, "can I cry and say I'm sorry, too!?" in order to make Loustat getting back together palatable. Lestat's the new MC, and Lestat's endgame for Louis, period, Rolin's said it 1000x. AMC has zero obligation to make Armand look any better, cuz Loumand's not endgame; Armand's not a focal point going forward. I reckon fan pressure from the Devil's Minion side will be MOST influential for getting AMC to give Armand a redemption arc--but that would be making a Armand better person for Daniel's sake as his Maker, NOT Louis' sake as his ex. But who knows, time will tell.

Loustat

Did Lestat do this literally, or did he recount the events out loud from his point of view, and Louis remembered? Because Claudia saw/heard the same things: it’s why she told him that Lestat was doing the retelling to hurt him further and what made her get on her feet to mock the audience for believing him.

I like your earlier point that AMC is obvs. adding objective POVs, where I responded about my own suspicions wrt 3rd person POVs AMC has included.

And I also like @alleyskywalker's point that maybe it's Armand sharing/projecting images/memories to Louis & Claudia--although that still leaves the door open for him to interfere with things.

Another thing that bugs me about the extent of Armand’s memory wiping powers is, if he’s time and time again used this power to paint Lestat in a negative light: 1: What purpose does softening Louis’ perception of himself serve? From what we’ve seen, Louis’ belief that he’s unable to control his temper and often causes grave damage to himself or others is crucial to the control Armand has over him. Making him believe he was helpless to stop Lestat’s turning of Claudia or unable to go through with burning Lestat because of Claudia doesn’t serve Armand in any way because then Louis would think he’s incapable of causing harm when he’s not under the power of stronger forces (older vampires, a child he loves unconditionally, etc). Having Louis believe he has self-control wouldn’t do Armand de I Need to be Needed any favours.

The Trial's EP4 revisit wasn't about softening Louis' perception of himself or making Louis think he could/couldn't stop Lestat. It was about implicating Louis in being aware of the coven's Great Laws forbidding turning children, and him making/manipulating/forcing Lestat to do it for him anyway, deliberately breaking the law & thus being guilty & deserving to be put to death. It painted Louis negatively to the audience AND the IRL fanbase. It wasn't about benefiting Armand per se; rather, it was just another coal on Louis' head to guarantee that he would be found guilty & killed. (And I've spoken sat length about why I think the revisit's scripted AF, even though SOME parts of it DO match with what we already saw in 1x4.)

I don’t think is entirely true. I think Louis blames himself for minor things or stuff he knows he didn’t do. But not about the things that would make his worldview take a 180-degree turn. Louis’ One Thing, Only Thing, has been Claudia’s death. As we saw in 1973, he cannot live with the memory of what happened to Claudia. In episode 5, when they start to talk about the events that directly lead to the trial, Daniel calls Louis out for using language that distances him from the narration, because it’s a difficult memory and one he’s never actually had himself recount, ever.  Raglan said 3 or 4 other journalists had tried to get the full story out of him and ended up dead or undead. Even in 1973 we see Louis and Armand use ‘Her’ instead of Claudia’s name when talking about Paris. In Season 1’s finale, we see him remember that it’s not Claudia who stopped them from burning Lestat; he was the one who used violence to stop her from finishing the act. Armand tells Daniel that he’d be ashamed of calling Louis a liar for his faulty memories after learning the full extent of the repercussions for not burning Lestat. I say this also applies to Louis. He is ashamed/cannot live with the fact that what he failed to do in NOLA is what led to the events in Paris (I’m speaking purely about the character’s mindset. I don’t think burning Lestat would’ve changed anything; it might have made things worse).  Cognitive dissonance again, and this time he resolved it by blaming Claudia. He’s believed the kinder version of events because he can’t face the fact that his refusal to burn Lestat is the reason why he could come to Paris and testify in the trial that ends up killing his daughter. To know himself as the man who picked Lestat and ended up condemning Claudia? That would send him to the sun 10 times over. And it’s easy to blame Armand for this again, say that he messed with the memory of Lestat’s killing and that’s why Louis blamed Claudia for the failure to burn him (which okay, if it kept Louis from the sun, is almost a sympathetic and loving edit, as messed up as that is lmao). But, Louis has read the diaries and knows Claudia hated him for 5 years while they were going through Europe. Daniel also mentions this in Season 1 iirc. So it’s not like Louis doesn’t know it wasn’t all roses between them after leaving NOLA.

Agreed.

Revisiting the Trial

2: Why would he leave his involvement with planning the trial in there? If he can basically snap a finger and rewire a memory forever (or drone on and on about a version of events until the victim fully believes him), he could remove himself from knowing about the planning altogether. If he can even make his victim hallucinate something (like Sam being next to him during the trial), he could’ve made Louis hallucinate him next to them on the stage during the trial. Why doesn’t he? Why leave the memory of his culpability in there despite knowing it’s the one thing Louis wouldn’t forgive Lestat for, let alone him?

EXCELLENT questions. 😂🤣

AMC's Trial changes very important bits from the book, that bring all of Armand's actions into question, and make him look either sinister AF (malicious!), or incompetent AF (in love!), or both (nuance™???). IMO he just grossly underestimated Daniel's ability to pick his lies apart (more on that below)--and for some strange reason, he never went after Sam (or got Louis to kill the last person involved in Claudia's murder, which is ALSO wildly OOC for Louis--unless he's been brainwashed with that "time heals all wounds" BS), to make sure Sam kept his mouth shut, let alone ran blabbing to the Talamasca. I've seen some fan theories that Sam was an agent for the Talamasca the whole time, which is WIIIIILD~! I can't WAIT for S3.

Louis prefers to believe a version of events that paint him in a kinder light, and so he wouldn’t willingly upset his worldview by reading an account that challenged it (“I knew who I was without those pieces.”) I don’t know whether he does this deliberately or by not fighting against Armand’s (supposed) control of the archives. I say deliberately because, once he gets the memory of Lestat’s non-burning right, he needs very little prodding to remember what happened next..... ....it’s Louis who decides what memories he carries and which ones he forgets or edits to maintain his self-perception. He doesn’t do this maliciously. I think everyone believes they’re better than they actually are. Not many people are willing to look in the mirror and truly see themselves, flaws and all. Louis “I didn’t put those there - You sure about that” de Pointe du Lac has gone through life refusing to look in the mirror. What likely happens is similar to what happened with Claudia’s turning: he made the story gentler for a child’s mind, like how mothers do with their kids’ birth stories, and likely retold it to her enough times that it became the full truth to him too. 

Louis' lost pieces come from A LOT of different places; and his triggers don't ALL react to the same stimuli or amount of prodding:

I think THE BULK of Lou's lost pieces are cuz of his own repressed memories & coping mechanisms from decades of trauma & PTSD & grief. He just doesn't WANT to remember bad things in his life ("I want to die!"), so he mindwipes himself; cuz suicidal tendencies & mental illness BOTH run in his family. (Dan has to GRILL Louis in 1x7 "was it raining; what murder? You don't need a memoir, you need 100 sessions of EMDR!"). Ofc by 10 sessions (2x8), we learn the truth about "Banishment," which changes the trajectory of the whole interview (Louis goes from toasting Armand across the table; to setting Dan's laptop on fire & running to NOLA)--

--because other lost pieces are predicated on The Seismic Lie that said "Lestat wanted US dead," (ie: Banishment); which have THOROUGHLY confused Louis wrt Les' motives, going alllll the way back to NOLA--"And then something real. This is Lestat." He's unsure if Les EVER loved him, or if Les EVER felt anything real for Lou beyond having "all the emotional acuity of A MONSTER~!" (a la ranting in 1973; a la book!IWTV)

And some are memories/lies Louis fabricates for himself, cuz he KNOWS Loustat shared real love (a la Dreamstat--did Les REALLY have Lou's initials monogrammed, or is that something Lou WISHES Les did for him?). Which makes the Banishment lie the deepest betrayal, cuz he's been operating for the past 77 years thinking Les hated his guts. He KNOWS that can't be true though, which is why he's so determined to get this 2nd interview right in 2022, where the 1st one in 1973 went wrong; "the more nuanced portrait."

Some are cuz of faulty memories & GAPS in his knowledge--during the Trial he was in & out of conscious cuz the coven kicked his head in & knocked him out cold in the Wet Room and he had a bleeding head wound the whole time he was on stage; and he was mind fogged so bad he was hemorrhaging from one eye; and had all these different versions of events thrown at him that had him confused even in Dubai 77 years later.

And ofc others are cuz he's been mindwiped ON; some of his memories are tampered with, and we'll NEVER know the full extent of what Armand did & didn't remove/replace; "I had a hunch."

LDPDL is the dictionary definition of Mentally Unwell, ("If I had been an actual journalist and, you know, not fried on coke and ludes, I would have realized what a dangerously unstable psyche I was with").

So I wouldn't say Lou needed "very little prodding"--he needs the entirety of S1 to even START the process of properly unlocking all of these memories, once Daniel realizes that the ravages of TIME aren't the problem with Louis' odyssey of recollection ("I never owned a Buick; you don't need a memoir!"). There's a bunch of other internal & external factors affecting Louis' memory, and it all goes back to the seeds planted when Dan said in 1x1: "I do my best work 1 on 1," without "Rashid's" constant interference.

The memories come flooding back, including and especially the more correct version of NOLA events that Lestat showed him during the trial re: Claudia’s turning, the fight, etc. If Armand had maliciously edited these memories, then he’d stop Louis from recovering them (kill Daniel and make Louis forget he even thought of doing an interview). But he doesn’t. He’s right there as these memories come back and, aside from suggesting Louis stops during emotionally charged moments, doesn’t prevent the remembering, despite this making it more likely that the extent of his betrayal would be uncovered. Why?

Both revisits were intended to show Louis in a bad light & condemn him to DEATH.

The 1x4 revisit was supposed to implicate Louis in breaking the Great Law against turning children. Neither Louis not Claudia could corroborate these events, and Louis gave up and just accepted it, "you should go with Lestat's version."

The 1x5 revisit was supposed to push Santiago's narrative of "mutual" abuse--"what's as bite between paramours; remember that we are monsters~!" and diffuse the brutality of Lestat's actions by minimizing Louis' pain "it was a hard fall, nothing more!" Claudia wanted Lestat dead after his actions in Ep5 proved to her that Les was no better than Bruce.

"I refuse the idea that Armand is some passive “I couldn’t prevent it” character. If he’s been editing Louis’ memories at will, then he’s a very actively malicious creature (even if he doesn’t think so). Moreover, the renewed memories paint Lestat in a much kinder picture, which doesn’t serve Armand de Possessive. "

The Trial was deliberately designed to prove that Claudia & Louis had NO right or reason to kill Lestat, and that NOTHING Lestat did warranted him being killed by his fledglings ("The father, duped by his ungrateful and diabolical children"). The Trial was meant to end with Claudia AND Louis DEAD. The malicious edits to the revisits are embedded in the script itself, with all the deflecting Santiago does to keep the narrative on track that Lestat is NOT the one on Trial (LESTAT: "I broke the Second Law. When you sentence them for their crimes, you sentence me too." SANTIAGO: "Ha! But you were manipulated into it...teased until you toppled!").

Armand doesn't HAVE to hide the Trial events from DanLou, cuz the Trial still ended with the seismic lie about "Banishment." By painting Lestat as the ultimate betrayer, Armand expertly diffused any & all forgiveness Louis could give Lestat; painted HIMSELF as the ultimate hero. Like, YES, Armand took care of Louis, and allowed him to stick to his vegan diet, and was never physically abusive (beyond NOT putting Louis in his coffin for hours (days?) on end in 2x5 so he could sleep & heal). But the decades of psychological manipulation are Armand's misstep, when he had SO many chances to come clean & never did--what hides in the dark comes out in the light! Louis tagged Daniel in for the 2nd interview & Dan came in clutch ("it's his job" "it's his drug" "I know. It's my job. I'm built this way!"), cuz Louis knew in his SPIRIT that something wasn't right about Armand; Jacob's talked about this several times.

What makes Armand de Possessive "more likely that the extent of his betrayal would be uncovered" is NOT the Trial proceedings being recounted to DanLou & Armand letting it happen (a la Lesmand in 2x3). It's Daniel's snooping with RAGLAN. If Dan hadn't gotten Sam's script from Raglan at the last minute, that interview would've ended with Loumand STILL together & Louis STILL lost in the sauce for another 77 years. 😬

Dan would've died from Parkinson's Disease, and NO ONE would be able to get close enough again to help Louis--god, when I think about how things could've turned out for Louis I get chills. Which is why I keep comparing IWTV to Get Out--the HORROR of psychological abuse & trauma effs me up way more than physical abuse--physical wounds heal, but mental damage can last forever; esp. when you're rewriting entire histories.

Cuz 100%, Armand should've killed Daniel the second he threw the real script at Louis. 😭🤦 Armand underestimated how much Lou would side with "insignificant" Dan over him ("She was a destitute little girl, destined to live an inconsequential little life!"); and Armand overestimated his ability to KEEP Lou & keep him mind-controlled.

I suspect that he was actively TRYING to mindwipe Louis when they ran into the living room, and that Louis was being mind-fogged offscreen.

"One night, 70 years ago. You are over this, Louis! The pain of it has left you. Don't let an insignificant detail, delivered from am insignificant mortal… You have forgiven me for what part I played in her death! And time has opened back up to us and we are once again teachers of one another. Louis, everything that gives you happiness gives me--Louis!"

But we've seen in 2x7 that even a BARRAGE of mind fogging CAN be shaken off if a vamp tries hard enough--Claudia did it several times, and even Louis managed to do it, even though it made his left eye start hemorrhaging.

So yeah, as to why Armand didn't rip Dan's head off, IDK. 🤷🤷 I think the DM fans might be onto something, that even then Armand was "hedging his bets" and kept Dan alive as a contingency plan to make his own fledgling if Louis left him. Which IS book!Armand's pattern of behavior.

Armand’s hold over Louis isn’t because of some insidious memory edit, it’s the ‘prison of empathy’. He doesn’t challenge Louis’ version of events, mostly because it puts his position as companion at risk. And Louis stays in this prison of empathy even as it suffocates him because he doesn’t want to face memory, the monster.

AGREED. Armand's "maliciousness" isn't cuz he HATES Louis & wants him dead (a la Santiago); it's cuz he's fatalistic to a fault and has twisted ideas about the world AND about love-as-service. He selfishly thinks he's doing Louis a favor/kindness/mercy by having his mind stay as scrambled as eggs, cuz Armand is thoroughly unequipped to handle ANYONE'S mental illness--not Louis, and as we'll likely see in S3, definitely not Nicky's. 💀 Lestat's fledglings keep ending up either suicidal or dead under Armand's watch ("Does he want to lick my boots or chop my hands off? Is it the gremlin or the good nurse tonight?" ).

Even Armand torturing Nicky & chopping his hands off was what Armand thought was an act of kindness/mercy, when he thought Nicky's obsessive violin playing was unhealthy. But violence isn't the answer. 😭😅 He does the wrong things for the right reasons; the road to hell is paved with good intentions, as I've constantly said about book!Armand.

But AMC's twisted that by having Armand actively trying to have Louis killed & lying about it, which takes the wind out of the sails.

TL;DR: My problem with blaming Armand for everything/most things Louis remembers wrong is that 1. It removes Louis’ agency and flattens his personality, and 2. Turns Armand into this Big Bad who plans and executes shit meticulously but somehow doesn’t do anything to stop people who’re 1000X weaker than him from unraveling these plans. I think most of these problems are because the show fucked with Louis’ and Armand’s characters in favour of Lestat’s, but that’s a story for another day.

So IMO, defending Louis' agency & autonomy WITHOUT addressing the roles played by Armand (and even moreso Lestat) in ABUSING Louis' agency/autonomy misses the point wrt this story's overall point about the abuse of power.

Who is ARMAND to determine the trajectory of Louis' life? He was all up in Daniel's face, "Why did I owe YOU my shame? Why did I owe YOU my one act of cowardice? The series of abhorrent consequences that followed?" Well, why does LOUIS owe ARMAND his life or sanity?

Cuz Armand's brand of empathy IS a prison--Louis built it, yes (as I said: the BULK of Louis' lost pieces is him coping with trauma & grief); but Armand holds the keys. Armand equates companionship to covenship, as if there has to be a master & a slave--same way Lestat did. (Only Claudeleine saw e/o as EQUALS.) And Louis' been beat down all his life that he comes to just accept when certain roles present themselves, even when they make him miserable--esp. when they're twisted to use his strengths & weaknesses against him.

Louis can stay in his mind palace of delusion all he wants--it's HIS life, and it should be HIS choice, HIS agency & HIS autonomy if he kills himself or starves himself or wtvr.

Armand treated Lou like a possession the same way Les did ("I GAVE you to Armand"), and not like his own person; it's ableist AF.

Only once Daniel exposed everything was Louis FINALLY able to "LEARN to live honestly." Lou can't learn or grow or KNOW himself, if Armand's ENABLING his worst habits, and SUPPRESSING Louis' identity, by REFUSING to "allow me my odyssey [of recollection]," just cuz YOU'RE too scared to be alone if I kill myself or leave you. Armand POUNCED at the opportunity to wipe Louis' memories, and LEAPT at the chance to remove extra pages from Claudia's diaries, taking undue ADVANTAGE of the trust Louis had in him.

Also, by lying about Banishment, he simultaneously ROBBED Loustat of the chance to grieve for their daughter properly. 77 years have been stolen & wasted on helping Louis AVOID uncomfortable truths about himself, rather than facing everything honestly. It's a childishly immature act that is in line with 17yrs!Armand, so I get what AMC was tryna do, but I agree that it doesn't do AMC!Armand any favors, when we see this uber-powerful vamp CONCEDE power to people 1000x weaker than he is--

--at least not without adequately contextualizing those concessions in ways the audience can understand/accept; what with the convoluted chronology and muddy motivations blurring the lines between clever plot twists & cheap plot contrivances.

But like I said, IMO S2 wasn't interested in exonerating Armand or painting him in a good light. IWTV's been about the abuse of power, and the various ways that ALL vampires have wronged e/o, Louis & Lestat & Armand included.

But it's also about the mishandling of power--not realizing the ways that ALL of these vamps really COULD have prevented the bad ish that happens.

BUT also also, the ways that all these vamps are doomed by the narrative to some extent ("But the suit changes nothing!"). Innocent children end up dead. Abuse victims either get back with their abusers; or they start the cycles of abuse in other ways. Guilty parties (like Sam) get off scott free for no reason.

IMO, saying Armand & Lestat are abusers is not flattening Louis' personality--it's the avoidance of Armand & Lestat's culpability and the overt insistence by Louis-antis/Lestans/Armstans that because Louis DOES make bad decisions that everything IS his fault that flattens Louis as a character. Louis can be a naive effing idiot AND his husbands can abuse him--both things can be true--and ARE. The denial of which is what I see as Santiagoisms, that strip away all context behind WHY Louis makes the decisions he makes; by deflecting/diffusing/minimizing the damage caused by the agents, factors & forces at play that move & direct & shape him in very specific ways:

from his homophobic godawful mother making Lou think he "failed my brother" (THE domino effect that set this whole story into motion in the first place)

to the white racists "It was the call and response of my entire life. I had let them talk to me like that so long, I stopped hearing it. 'Yes, sir. Of course, sir.' Subject, verb, agreement, 'sir.' Smile, nod, 'yes, sir.' They all came from the same organ inside me, an organ unknown to science at the time. Because what scientist would look for an organ found only in BLACK MEN who use their weakness to rise?"

to French White Lestat's constant God Complex rhetoric ("you need to show restraint, fledgling!")

to the obligations Lou felt towards Claudia conflicting with his love of Lestat despite all the heinousness Les had done to BOTH of them ("You want to kill him too, and you will enjoy doing it!")

to Santiago ("I handled folks like Santiago both my lives. I don't need you flying in like vampire papa.")

to Armand ("You think I need to be coddled, hyped up, lied to?")

to Daniel disrespecting Louis at every turn, up until 2x6 ("I could be your Lestat, your Claudia, but better! I mean, I got a little bit of both of them in me, plus a few things they don't.")

And it's using one's weakness to rise that I love most about Louis, cuz I've been saying since Day One that Louis has POWER IN SUBMISSION; playing INTO people constantly underestimating him; ESPECIALLY Lestat & Armand, by NOT seeming like a threat. It's not that he's victim = weak = helpless damsel = blameless = victim, it's that he's weaker → vulnerable → victim → unreliable narrator → weaker. And the TRIUMPH of Louis' story arc completing in S2 (that CELEBRATES the fact that he is NOT a flat & hollow shell that's had his whole identity scooped out of him by BOTH his p.o.s. husbands) is that he's FINALLY able to break the cycle & Get Out of this Sunken Place!

He shoves Armand into a effing wall & throws the script at his effing face & reconciles with Lestat & declares he's "companion enough FOR MYSELF" & redecorates the whole penthouse & puts Paul AND Claudia on his wall in places of HONOR--to HONOR their memory, and all that that implies; cuz Memory is NOT the monster--ABUSE & DENIAL is. The bloodstains are still on her dress; he didn't get it cleaned off--he didn't remove the rocks from his feet for 70+ years. He's WANTED to fully remember the good AND the bad this entire time, and Armand ("you're lingering, Rashid!") never let him. He tells Armand "you need to be GONE," so Louis can FINALLY start healing & relearning who TF he is bless and amen I LOVE this for him. 😤👏❤️

IWTV S2 Tentative Timeline (Pt2c) - Unreliable Narrators, Armand & the Trial

Thanks for the response to Pt2b, @usuallydeepalpaca-blog! I really want people to talk to me about the IWTV timelines, cuz this show is SO confusing! 😩😭

"I think if you create the timeline with info the show doesn't provide, i.e. Armand was involved from the start, then you're bound to get it wrong."

Absolutely. I fully expect that I got some stuff wrong, which is why I said it's a TENTATIVE Timeline.

I've in no way said it's THEE CORRECT™ timeline, cuz chile IDKWTF is going on. 😅 I openly say what confuses me, questions I have, and how I come to the conclusions that I draw. I'm being as transparent as possible to let y'all know that I DON'T know. 🤷 The show doesn't provide EVERYthing, so I'm just piecing things together in a way that makes an iota of sense to me, following the logic of what the show HAS provided. The only solid details we have are diehard IRL dates, that gave us a time range when certain events can/can't happen. AFAIK I'm working with the same set of details everyone else has, until AMC gives us more info in S3+. And unfortunately, the 2 biggest unknown variables are Lestat & Armand, and to what extent they were/weren't involved in the Trial that got Claudia killed & Louis buried alive.

"saying Armand messed with Louis' memories re: the trial is also something not supported by the show."

The show obvs. wants us to assume that Armand made Louis hallucinate Sam guarding him in the theatre box (thus painting Armand as a "captive" along with Louis & Claudeleine).

Even if Armand didn't use the Mind Gift on Louis, he lied at least twice:

lies by omission: letting Louis think a hallucination of Sam was real

lies to Louis' (& Daniel's) face: going along with the premise that he was Sam's "captive" & Armand sat there the whole time thinking of a way to rescue Louis

And we KNOW this is a lie, cuz Daniel calls it out explicitly, asking how Sam can be "in two places at once," allegedly "guarding" Armand, but ALSO helping to torture Louis in the Wet Room.

Armand never denied or contradicted Louis saying Sam was in either place. Maybe Louis really did misremember Sam being in the wet room--the ONLY one who can corroborate all this is SAM--whom Armand ALSO lies on, throwing Sam, Daniel & the Talamasca all under the bus by saying the script with his handwriting all over it was forged! No honor amongst thieves I guess! 🤣

(Eff Lestat's POV in S3--when is SAM gonna give HIS POV of the Trial?!)

So I'm operating on patterns of behavior, and the logic that if he's deliberately lying about one thing (a VERY BIG THING, actually), then what else is he lying about? How are you "atoning" for anything, when you're just heaping lies on top of gaslighting on top of manipulation?

Armand has used Louis' obvious confusion to his advantage, just going along with whatever will make him look better & more sympathetic. Which ofc, is the exact same thing he does with the "Banishment" lie. "They gave me a choice...I could not prevent it" is the truth and a lie all rolled into one incredibly manipulative cocktail, cuz if it was just a simple matter of Armand selling Claudia out to save Louis, that would be one thing--but Armand KNEW the script planned LOUIS' death the whole time. The "seismic lie" about "Banishment" effs up Armand's whole defense.

Cuz Sam already wrote the script in April 1949 (and I said this is confusing, cuz if it's the WHOLE script, then this implies Lestat's half was written by then, too, and NOT in September after the Eiffel Tower crime--which means he was ALREADY in Paris & working with the coven; inc. Armand (which would also explain WHY Armand took Louis to the library so much--perhaps anticipating that Loustat would feel e/o's presence if Louis was around the theatre too much? But that doesn't explain Claudia)--omfg I'm confused). Wtvr--we KNOW that at some point b/t April & September 1949, Armand made his edits & directed the entire production--from Santiago to Lestat to Tuan's projections--ALL of it. And we know Tuan's projections started being made in June/July 1949.

Armand KNEW Daniel had been given the OLD script from the archives, WITHOUT Armand's edits & directions, and LET Daniel AND Louis think that was the truth--

--same way he went behind Louis' back and removed extra pages from Claudia's diaries that would reveal MORE of his shenanigans--

--and the same way he lied about Nicki (& Gabrielle) in 2x3.

The show ALSO provides us with quotes like this:

And this:

And this:

Which in retrospect make Armand look even more insidious, esp. when we wonder to what extend Louis' been "driven to form new conclusions about myself" when he doesn't even KNOW himself; let alone WHAT memories he has that are real or false.

It's so effed up, and it makes me side-eye all the insistence that LOUIS is the one mostly at fault, when he's got literal double-hypnosis Brain Scramblies from WWDITS. 😭🤦

Ofc there are unknown-unknowns when dealing with unreliable narration. But there are also known-unknowns, too, that also make Armand sus.

Sure, Loumand was away at the library in July (IF that memory's even real, Mr. "I Had A Hunch")--but how on earth would Armand have NOT known that the coven was working on the Trial right under his nose for MONTHS prior & after July--Luchenbaum sewing new barrister costumes & wigs; Tuan painting projections & testing new lens/film tech; and Sam writing a new script (when we already KNOW Sam can't multitask when his "head's in a hat")?

July is only ONE month in over HALF A YEAR of Trial prep. Louis was never around the coven to know what was going on--but ARMAND was; it's where HE lives.

Whose POV was it that showed the whole coven passing around Claudia's diaries? Whose POV was it that revealed Santiago being called Maitre in every scene that ARMAND was also in?

Armand was in the park with Tuan when Tuan called Santiago Maitre; and Armand was in the theatre with Sam when Sam called Santiago Maitre--so this is clearly either Armand's POV telling on himself; or it's AMC screwing with us.

It's TRUE that Turning Madeleine was the straw that broke the camel's back, as Armand was like I can't keep THAT a secret from the coven, too (and ofc he couldn't--they're VAMPIRES; they'd FEEL a new vamp in their territory). But Loumand's problems PREDATE Madeleine; the same way Loustat's problems predate Claudia. I blame Les for not dealing with Lou's BS, just like I blame Armand, cuz THEY are the Coven Masters, NOT Lou--esp. cuz Armand had 14 other vamps in his coven he SHOULD be prioritizing over Lou. The same way Loustat's guilty of being bad fathers (which they BOTH admitted to), Armand's guilty of being a bad coven leader (which HE admitted to).

IMO, all this makes any & all discussion about Armand's trustworthiness difficult, when his "seismic lie" throws EVERYTHING else he's done into question. Esp. since the show ALSO provides us with the FACT that Armand knew from DAY ONE that Claudia lied about "Bruce"/Lestat; and that Louis was a terrible liar & terrible with the Mind Gift; and that he'd ALREADY planned on killing Louis in 2x3! Armand knew from the get-go that he couldn't do EFF ALL to keep Louis & Claudia out of danger, and TOLD Louis so.

"It also ignores that Louis softens his participation in certain things because he can't live with the guilt of his full participation, e.g. Claudia's turning, which he continued to lie to Claudia about even during the trial and only accepted the extent of his involvement in Dubai"

The Trial Timeline's purpose is to pinpoint when the preparations took place, NOT to hash out how bad of a father Louis was to Claudia. 🤨

And it certainly isn't meant to provide a timeline for the events in S1 wrt Claudia's Turning--we already know the dates for all of that, that she was made in 1917. I focus on the 1940s in S2, and the European dates, NOT the NOLA dates. LOUIS did not participate in the Trial's preparations, ARMAND & LESTAT did. My timeline has ZERO bearings on Louis' guilt for not warning her, etc.

But on the subject of Louis & Claudia, I've cussed Louis out for not telling Claudia about Armand b4 (x x), I don't ignore it at all. I fully understand & even agree with Armand being fed up with dealing with Louis' BS. But HE CHOSE not to kill Louis when he had the chance, and it's obvs that whatever arrangement they made when they had sex in 2x3/2x4 allowed Louis to TRUST that Armand would keep "the secret" & keep Louis & Claudia SAFE from the coven. (Which is a BOGUS claim for him to make, when Santiago'd ALREADY peeped that they were lying about Lestat & being from NOLA, but wtvr). I've called Louis a naive idiot 1000x for overestimating Armand, putting his life in Armand's incapable hands--just like he would AGAIN by trusting him about "Banishment;" and AGAIN by asking Armand to wipe his memories in SanFran (and LIE by omission about Les saying "I love you, Louis").

"Louis remembers the trial, he remembers what was said and what Lestat showed him."

HOW can Lestat have showed Louis ANY memories during the Trial (inc. the Ep4 revisit), when Makers/Fledglings CANNOT read each other's minds???????

I love this show so much, but I effing hate this show--they don't even give us an answer, Daniel just moves right past it, like wtf are we supposed to do with that, AMC? There's plot threads, vs plot HOLES. Louis' TOO unreliable, Armand's a shysty liar, white savior Lestat to the rescue~~~! "BANishMEnT~!" As if Lestat's any less impartial?

Esp. when at least SOME parts of the Ep4 Revisit were OBVIOUSLY Scripted lines written by the coven to implicate Louis in breaking the Great Laws that Lestat allegedly taught him AND Claudia to follow?

Like, Louis HATES himself, and is quick to blame himself for things beyond his control (a la Paul, a la the Ordinances; "Can we be forgiven if we do not forgive others ourselves?"); so if one is determined to see him bad faith then of course one can easily pounce on him Florence DPDL style / Santiago style, and blame him.

(Esp. since in 1x4 we literally SEE Louis admit to begging & emotionally baby-trapping Lestat into turning Claudia--the revisit in 2x7 is more (melo)dramatic & extended, sure, but it does NOT contradict Louis' account in S1. So I get REAL confused when people say he lied about 1x4 or wtvr.)

Louis invalidates his perspective cuz he KNOWS he's an unreliable narrator--he spends 2x1 sobbing about wanting to remember & "get every detail right"--and ARMAND is there constantly tryna STOP the interview; having directly contributed to his already deteriorated (& inherited?) mental illness, by bending Lou's trauma into "a Lestat shaped-effigy" with all that "I will not harm you" bullcrap.

TL;DR: We won't know for sure what the Trial timeline actually looks like, unless S3+ revisits it with more context.

But as things stand at the end of S2, NO, I don't trust Armand as far as I can throw him, cuz there are waaaay too many instances where he's deliberately lied & obfuscated & omitted in ways to deliberately confuse the narrative surrounding the Trial--that go beyond Louis' already confirmed trauma, PTSD, mental illness, repressed/faulty memory, and guilty conscious.

If y'all want a timeline of S1 events, those have already been made by other people in the fandom (this one is goated).

I wanted to know what was going on in S2; so I used every single date and IRL reference possible, and put them in chronological order in a way that makes sense based on how I TENTATIVELY understand things currently; NOT how AMC has confirmed yet--if they ever will.

If anyone has more relevant in-show references & IRL sources we can cite, to help make better sense of S2 than I did, let us all know!

[pens-and-paperbacks]

Endeavor is almost a perfect allegory for what the society in the mha universe does to people who can't be heroes or use their quirks in a way to benefit society, which is cast them aside or pass them over without over giving them a second glance until uh-oh! Suddenly they're worth being noticed because they're a threat.

He apologizes to his family, which is good! If you're a bad person and did terrible things, the first step in your own transformation and atonement should be to acknowledge what you've done and to apologize to those you've wronged. Great!

Thing is, Endeavor set off a chain reaction with his abusive, neglectful and downright irresponsible choices that it damaged everyone in his family for life.

I don't think someone who causes one of their own children to literally go up in flames, crying because they're finally getting attention from their father and family in the very end, ever deserves to be forgiven.

[oneiricazalea]

Happy 5th birthday to my dear OC, Sei ♥

[deviousdiesel]

.

[the-judicial-assistants-notebook]

It's not that I don't love that she was there, but Kay really had no business being in AAI2

[nozomijoestar]

I know people hate SMT Nocturne's approach to characters but I love this shit, they feel like puddles that drag you down into an ideological sea once you start thinking on what they represent and the context of the situations the game put them in or what they say/how they act pre and during Vortex World, and their isolation from the player makes them doomed from getting any help being faced with their ugly inner selves until it's too late

[physalian]

How To Make Your Writing Less Stiff 5

Movement

Dredging this back up from way back.

Make sure your characters move, but not too much during heavy dialogue scenes. E.g. two characters sitting and talking—do humans just stare at each other with their arms lifeless and bodies utterly motionless during conversation? No? Then neither should your characters. Make them…

Gesture

Wave

Frown

Laugh

Cross their legs/their arms

Shift around to get comfortable

Pound the table

Roll their eyes

Point

Shrug

Touch their face/their hair

Wring their hands

Pick at their nails

Yawn

Stretch

Sniff/sniffle

Tap their fingers/drum

Bounce their feet

Doodle

Fiddle with buttons or jewelry

Scratch an itch

Touch their weapons/gadgets/phones

Check the time

Get up and sit back down

Move from chair to tabletop

The list goes on.

Bonus points if these are tics that serve to develop your character, like a nervous fiddler, or if one moves a lot and the other doesn’t—what does that say about the both of them? This is where “show don’t tell” really comes into play.

As in, you could say “he’s nervous” or you could show, “He fidgets, constantly glancing at the clock as sweat beads at his temples.”

This site is full of discourse on telling vs showing so I’ll leave it at that.

Epithets

In the Sci-fi WIP that shall never see the light of day, I had a flashback arc for one male character and his relationship with another male character. On top of that, the flashback character was a nameless narrator for Reasons.

Enter the problem: How would you keep track of two male characters, one who you can't name, and the other who does have a name, but you can’t oversaturate the narrative with it? I did a few things.

Nameless Narrator (written in 3rd person limited POV) was the only narrator for the flashback arc. I never switched to the boyfriend’s POV.

Boyfriend had only a couple epithets that could only apply to him, and halfway through their relationship, NN went from describing him as “the other prisoner” to “his cellmate” to “his partner” (which was also a double entendre). NN also switched from using BF’s full name to a nickname both in narration and dialogue.

BF had a title for NN that he used exclusively in dialogue, since BF couldn’t use his given name and NN hadn’t picked a new one for himself.

Every time the subject of the narrative switched, I started a new paragraph so “he” never described either character ambiguously mid-paragraph.

Is this an extreme example? Absolutely, but I pulled it off according to my betas.

The point of all this is this: Epithets shouldn’t just exist to substitute an overused name. Epithets de-personalize the subject if you use them incorrectly. If your narrator is thinking of their lover and describing that person without their name, then the trait they pick to focus on should be something equally important to them. In contrast, if you want to drive home how little a narrator thinks of somebody, using depersonalizing epithets helps sell that disrespect.

Fanfic tends to be the most egregious with soulless epithets like "the black-haired boy" that tell the reader absolutely nothing about how the narrator feels about that black-haired boy, espeically if they're doing so during a highly-emotional moment.

As in, NN and BF had one implied sex scene. Had I said “the other prisoner” that would have completely ruined the mood. He’s so much more than “the other prisoner” at that point in the story. “His partner,” since they were both a combat team and romantically involved, encompassed their entire relationship.

The epithet also changed depending on what mood or how hopeless NN saw their situation. He’d wax and wane over how close he believed them to be for Reasons. NN was a very reserved character who kept BF at a distance, afraid to go “all in” because he knew there was a high chance of BF not surviving this campaign. So NN never used “his lover”.

All to say, epithets carried the subtext of that flashback arc, when I had a character who would not talk about his feelings. I could show you the progression of their relationship through how the epithets changed.

I could show you whenever NN was being a big fat liar about his feelings when he said he's not in love, but his narration gave him away. I could show you the exact moment their relationship shifted from comrades to something more when NN switched mid-paragraph from "his cellmate" to "his partner" and when he took up BF's nickame exclusively in the same scene.

I do the same thing in Eternal Night when Elias, my protagonist, stops referring to Dorian as "it" and "the vampire" instead of his name the moment they collide with a much more dangerous vampire, so jarringly that Elias notices in his own narration—the point of it being so explicit is that this degredation isn't automatic, it's something he has to conciously do, when everyone else in his clan wouldn't think twice about dehumanizing them.

—

Any literary device should be used with intent if you want those layers in your work. The curtains are rarely just blue. Whether it’s a simile with a deliberate comparison or an epithet with deliberate connotations, your readers will pick up on the subtext, I promise.

[whimsiwitchy]

Controversially Young Girlfriend 

Hugh Jackman x popstar!reader 

series masterlist & main masterlist

summary: y/n is a globally beloved pop star. She is known for her talent and dedication towards her craft. Recently, she has also been known for her preference for older men. After a breakup with her former older boyfriend, she had a run in with the hottest dilf right now, Hugh Jackman. Y/n tried to warn him, but what can she say, she has an effect on hot, older men. 

warnings: age gap (23/55), cursing, y/n used, implied shorter reader, afab reader, she/her pronouns. 

warnings will change as the story progresses! all descriptions of real people in this story are FAKE. i do not know these people and this is purely fiction. Please let me know if I missed anything! <33

authors note: this is an idea I had that I really needed to write. I’d love to make this a series if you guys want more, just let me know! This is only my second time writing fanfiction and my first time writing for Hugh, please be nice lol. Thank you for reading! <3

Part one: breakup and new beginnings 

Being a young girl living in the middle of bumfuck nowhere made it seem impossible to live your dreams of becoming a singer. You grew up in a tiny little town in Louisiana called Minden. With a population of less than 15,000 people, the closest ‘big’ city being Shreveport, growing up was pretty boring. You had big dreams of making it big and making it the fuck out of the country. Minden wasn’t always so bad. It was a nice community that had fun things here and there, but you craved more. 

Once you graduated highschool back in 2020, you focused on working and saving as much money as you could, only buying essentials and equipment to help make music. You took a few online classes on producing and tried your best to make whatever song was bouncing around in your head come to life. It took a year for you to feel confident enough to release your first few songs out into the world. So in July of 2021, you teased a song on TikTok to your small following. You started to gain a few more followers here and there, it was exciting. At the end of August, you released your first song titled ‘to the point’ and it blew up on the clock app. You gained a hefty following after that, on the brink of hitting one million. 

By the end of 2022, deciding on Los Angeles, you had finally saved enough money to move, so you were packing your bags and heading out. Your agent was ecstatic about the move because it meant more opportunities for your career. After releasing a few more songs over the past year, you hired Stacy to help you manage everything. 

Fastwording to 2024, your dreams have come true and you have been an established and respected artist for almost two years. You started to build a reputation as someone who was dedicated and passionate about their craft- always being involved in any creative process. It was bliss. Lately though, you’ve gained another reputation, the controversial young girlfriend, a whore, a gold digger. Since you’ve been in the spotlight, you’ve had your fair share of dating history and if they all happened to be older men, so what? It wasn’t something you had planned on but older men were just built differently. They were so much sexier and put together than the guys your age. They knew what they were doing and how to treat a woman right. You were so tired of being asked out through instagram direct messages, you wanted someone who wasn’t afraid to talk to you in person, and that seemed to only come from men twice your age. You weren’t complaining though, you enjoyed it. 

Your last ‘scandalous’ relationship ended up being far more public than you intended it to be. In the beginning, the men you were seen with were never anything serious, just dates or one night stands. Though with Pedro it was different. You dated him for six months before it all came crashing down and you felt heartbroken. He was the sweetest man you’d ever been with and it all ended because the hate from fans on our age gap was too much for him. It was an ugly breakup and you were positive that he wouldn’t want to be associated with you anymore, even as friends. 

-

“I should have picked a different song.” You huff in frustration. Today you were going to be performing on BBC’s Radio 1 Live Lounge and as requested, you'd be performing your own song and a cover of your choosing. When Stacy first presented this opportunity to you, it had only been a month after your recent breakup and naturally you chose to cover ‘THE GREATEST’ by Billie Eilish. Now that you were mostly over Pedro, the song seemed silly to sing and you weren’t feeling as vocally confident now that you were here. 

“Babe, you’re gonna kill it! Just let your emotions flow, give the fans what they want.” Stacy is sitting across the room as she comforts you. She’s fidgeting with your vocal humidifier, attempting to put it together before you start warming up. Her advice isn’t terrible, she’s right. You’d been pretty silent on the subject matter, steering clear of social media so you wouldn’t say anything stupid. Rumors of your breakup had been all over the headlines but there hasn’t been confirmation from either of you. Singing this song today would definitely stir the pot again and make everyone realize that it is done between you two. 

“You’re right.” 

“As always. Here, start warming up the money maker.” She laughs while handing you the humidifier. 

“I really hope he doesn’t watch it. I’d literally smash my head into a brick wall out of embarrassment…” 

Placing the humidifier over your mouth and nose, you sit there letting your mind wander. Having your personal life exposed to everyone really sucked and hiding your boyfriends wasn’t something you wanted to do, but you knew that in the future it was something that would have to happen. 

“I think I’m taking a break from men.” You let out proudly, glancing over at Stacy. 

“Whatever you say girl.” You could hear the doubt lingering in her tone and the roll of her eyes. 

“Ugh… You don’t believe me do you? I can totally break off from men and be my own person for once.” 

“I’m not trying to doubt you babe. It’s just…You tend to attract men like a magnet and you have some severe daddy issues.” She's typing away on her laptop as if she didn’t just completely disrespect you. 

“I don’t have daddy issues.” You say flatly. “I happen to have a very loving father who was always present in my life, so the whole dating older men thing does NOT stem from daddy issues. Thank you very much.” You say matter of factly. 

“Hm..Well I give it a week.” 

-

After a few sound checks for your mic and band, you perform your first song. You chose a more upbeat song off your debut album to start, given that you were about to lay your heart out of the line. It was honestly kind of awkward performing in this setting. There was a booth in front of you that had the sound board and all of the other electronic stuff that you didn’t understand. Then right to the left of that, the cameras were positioned with a group of crew members sitting behind them. It always felt awkward performing to smaller audiences. 

The first song went by smoothly, earning a few cheers from the people in the room. As the band prepared for the next song, you could see the door in the booth open and two figures walk in. You weren’t wearing your glasses or contacts since it was supposed to be a short day, so you really couldn’t make out who had just walked in. You assumed more workers came in and brushed it off. 

“All ready?” A man behind the camera asks and you give a thumbs up. 

You somehow managed to get through the song without having any vocal mess ups. It was a challenging song and you'd definitely have to text Billie later to give her some credit. A few tears slipped here and there, feeling the emotions that you thought were gone slowly be released. You pulled yourself together and you felt really proud of the performance as a whole, showing the world the potential your voice had. 

A few soft claps are dying out as everyone starts cleaning up the room. You’re reaching down to grab your water bottle when you feel someone rushing up towards you. 

“Ahhh you did great babe but um two hot dudes will be walking through that door any second!” Stacy is whispering and all you could do was give her a confused look before the door opens. You squint trying to make out the two figures. 

“God you’re talented!” You hear the voice before you see the face. 

“Oh um, thank you so much.” You let out not really sure who you were speaking to. Once the two men get into view, your jaw drops slightly. 

“HOLY SHIT!” You yell a little too loudly. Slapping your hand over your mouth, you hear a very rich man laugh coming from a very good looking man. For some reason, whoever is in charge of the fate of the universe has blessed you with the presence of Ryan Reynalds and Hugh Jackaman. 

“Oh my god i’m so sorry, that’s literally so embarrassing. I just couldn’t see who you were at first.” 

“It’s okay sweetheart.” They both wear big smiles on their faces. 

“I’m y/n, it’s so nice to meet y’all, i’m a big fan!” You gush out, trying your best to refrain from fangirling. 

“We’re big fans as well. We were next door interviewing for the radio show, when we heard you were recording over here. We ran over here to try to catch you.” Ryan lets out. 

“No shit! That’s so cool. I really appreciate it.” Before the conversation could continue, Ryan is being called over by someone, leaving Hugh and yourself alone. 

“Hows Pedro, haven't seen him in awhile.” Hugh asks genuinely, giving you a small smile. It caught you off guard completely. You racked your brain trying to think of a time in your six month relationship that Pedro mentioned Hugh at all but nothing came up. 

“Oh I uh- I wouldn’t know. We aren’t together anymore.” Your voice is soft, trying not to make this any more awkward. 

“Shit. I’m so sorry, with the way he spoke about you, I thought you’d be together longer…” He trails off. 

“Yea me too.. he couldn’t handle the heat I guess.” You shrug. 

“Well, his loss yea?” He smiles trying to cheer you up. 

“Yea..” You say softly, your voice matching your smile. You take a moment to really look at him and he’s beyond handsome. He’s aged but in a way that makes you wish you were able to see the years go by with him. He was tall, almost towering over you, and his muscles were practically popping out of his shirt. 

The same guy that was walking to Ryan, gathers the three of you for a picture for the BBC socials. You stand in the middle, both men placing their arms behind either side of you. Hugh’s hand was placed on the small of your back. You looked up at him quickly, his face already smiling at the camera. You hear the camera go off a few times, causing you to look that way as well. Once the cameraman was satisfied, everyone gave their goodbyes and the room cleared out. 

-

Later that night you were scrolling through your phone when a text popped up from Stacy. 

Stacypoo <33: I told you. You couldn’t even go a week. ;) 

The text is accompanied by a screenshot of a notification stating that “‘thehughjackman’ started following you!”. You rushed to open instagram and went to your followers to search from his name. You stared at his page for a few minutes before following him back. 

While you had control over your own social media, someone handled all of your business related content. You went on your page to see that the picture that was taken at BBC earlier today was already posted with one comment standing out beyond the rest. 

Thehughjackman: Great meeting you sweetheart! :)

Thank you for reading <3

part two

[phantasm-echo]

POV: you wake up in the middle of your own autopsy with force powers then immediately get brainwashed into falling to the dark side

I was reminded of the fact that I haven’t drawn inquisitor!fives’ autopsy scars in way too long so here I am, delivering a few too many Fives 💀

Anyway I know I don’t post much about the AU on here so props to anyone who knows what’s going on here even slightly, I’ve decided to nerf siren!echo (who WAS part of this AU yes I know quite random) but since him being turned into a siren kinda limits what I can do with him story wise he is now an AU of the AU.

That means the name I came up with for the au (dead mean walking/swimming or dmw(s) as I’ve been tagging it) is kinda irrelevant. I’ll just call this the inquisitor fives AU but if you have any AU name suggestions feel free to drop them.

Here are some of the major factors of the AU:

It gets worse before it gets better

(WARNING: there are quite a few heavy topics covered in the AU such as torture, dehumanisation and su*cidal thoughts, so pls read at your own discretion)

- fives wakes up in the middle of his own autopsy with force sensitivity, then gets brainwashed into falling to the Dark Side by Palpatine. As an Inquisitor, he does not remember anything about his life because those memories were blocked by Palpatine.

- Palpatine discovers that Fives is essentially immortal, and any injuries inflicted on him will heal no matter how bad.

- when echo gets rescued from skako minor, he is recalled to Kamino for experimentation, first of all so they can figure out what the Techno Union did to him, second of all to see how he survived his injuries. Nala se, who knows that fives came back to life, theorises that since he and echo were tube twins they share the “immortality”. He is kept on Kamino for VERY extensive experimentation where terrible things happen to him (cough vivisection cough lobotomy) and so never joins Clone Force 99 even if he did work with them on Anaxes.

- Fives in this time is sent out on many missions by Palpatine that involve him unaliving many people, and after the rise of the Empire he hunts a few Jedi.

- Fox, who throughout the war had experienced many blackout missions where he woke up afterwards covered in blood, is the last living Coruscant Guard commander. (Thorn dies, stone vanishes one day, Thire mistakes Vader for a Jedi and pays the price) Despite the best efforts of his son secretary Dogma (no way!?) Fox has very little will to live, is extremely depressed and borderline suicidal, he would like nothing more than to bite the dust, but still feels he has a duty to the very few remaining corries and so tries to keep it together (he is failing)

- one day Palpatine decides he doesn’t need Fox to do his bidding anymore since he has much better assets at his disposal (Fives), and decides it would be ironic to sic his pet clone inquisitor onto Fox. Fives still doesn’t remember anything, and only knows that Fox is responsible for the main scars on his body and believes fox is the reason he doesn’t remember most of his life, and so sets out to kill fox. They battle it out (ref to that one animation wip I posted) and fives is on the verge of killing fox (who didn’t really try to fight that much, like I said he would very much like to die and dying at the hand of the vod he “killed” seems fitting to him) when he gets a sudden vision of echo.

- all fives knows is echo is extremely important to him and must be rescued and that snaps him out of palpatine’s control. He knows he probably can’t rescue echo alone, and since fox has already been betrayed by the empire he decides “fuck it” and basically kidnaps fox and they run. They make a deal, that once echo has been found, Fives will put Fox out of his misery (fox feels that fives should be the only person to kill him, and only goes along with the plan because he refuses to let anyone else kill him)

- fox and fives proceed to go on an intergalactic road trip to “rescue echo” even though neither of them know how to do that. They become closer friends throughout, and fives slowly regains bits and pieces of the Before

- meanwhile during the destruction of Kamino, the bad batch stumble on echo and rescue him and he stays with them for a little bit before leaving with Rex

- meanwhile Dogma helps the rest of the remaining Corries desert, kills too many storm troopers, and tries to go after his buir fox and the bastard inquisitor who kidnapped him

This is the main stuff you need to know for the AU haha so if you’ve got new name suggestions I’m all ears ty!!

[shushmal]

The latest Family Video customer is barely through the door before Eddie explodes, "Ugh, Tyler."

Beside him, Steve scoffs in agreement, nose wrinkled with distaste. He's so hot. "Yeah, exactly, uugh."

"That should be his middle name. Ugh," Robin chimes in. Eddie's so glad they're in agreement about the bleach-spiked punk guy that graduated three years ago but is still bumming around Hawkins. "Steve, I can't believe you dated that guy."

Seriously, Tyler is the worst— Wait, what—?

"Wait," Eddie says, gaping at Robin. "What?"

"You could barely call it dating," Steve huffs.

"You were together for a month and a half," Robin says. She's got this evil grin on her face and is pointedly not looking at Eddie who is very desperate for Robin to look at him right now, please. "You drove that bum to Indy every weekend. He broke up with you on Valentine's day."

Eddie's weak "Tyler? Tyler Teaks?" gets completely ignored.

"I—" Steve says with haughty emphasis. "—broke up with him on Valentine's day. Don't get it twisted, Buckley."

Robin snorts and finally glances at Eddie. "Steve only broke up with him because the guy blew him off. On Valentine's Day. Which is basically getting broken up with," she tells him, and ignores it when Eddie whimpers at her.

"Yeah, but I'm the one to ended it!" Steve insits.

Eddie, finally, finds his voice, and says, "Tyler Teaks?! Harrington!"

"Ugh," Steve says, slumping against the counter. "I know." He cuts a glare over at Eddie after a moment. "I blame you for this."

"Me?!" Eddie shrieks, incredulous. He's pretty sure he's stepped into another parallel world. Perpendicular world? A world where Steve apparently dates guys—and guys like Tyler Teaks, no less. Eddie's sure he's gone completely batshit insane. "What the hell did I do?!"

Steve stands, cocking his hip the side, and looks down his handsome nose at Eddie. "You wouldn't be my New Year's kiss at Tina's party," he says. "So I had to settle for Tyler Teaks instead."

"What the fuck?" Eddie says, completely lost. "What—? You—? Tina—? KISS—?!"

Beside them, Robin is grinning, laughing, eyes going back and forth between them, munching on a stolen back of skittles—her own personal dramedy on stage before her.

"Yep," Steve says, popping the P. He looks distinctly bitter. "Pulled my best moves on you, and you turned me down."

"Steve," Eddie breathes. He reaches out, places both hands on Steve's shoulders, intent. The eye contact he forces Steve into is desperate. "I don't even remember getting to Tina's New Year's Party." He takes a deep breath. "I woke up in her mom's pantry the next morning with no shoes and no memory of how I got there."

Finally, Steve cracks, a big smile stretching his face. Robin cackles. "Yeah, I kind of figured as much," Steve sighs, wistful now. "You told me, and I quote, 'Steve Harrington, you are very beautiful and I want to have a summer wedding because you'd look beautiful-er with sunflowers'—"

"Don't forget the 'you look so hot in that sweater' part."

"—'But actually, I am a very straight man. So very super straight.' And then you crouched down on the floor and crawled away." Steve is biting his lip now to keep from laughing. Robin is not so nice. "Like I couldn't see you, and the handkerchief flagging in your pocket."

"Oh my god."

"Don't worry, it was really cute," Steve says, grinning. "But, I still needed a New Year's kiss, and unfortunately for everyone involved, Tyler was my only willing choice."

"Oh my god."

"Totally duped me though, he was super sweet the entire night," Steve sighs. His mouth is twisted into genuine regret now. "Plus, the next week, you acted like you'd never spoken to me before, so—"

"OH MY GOD."

Steve and Robin give him twin grimaces. Robin's is a lot more sympathetic. Steve's is confused. "Listen, man," Steve tries to soothe. "I'm sure that's pretty embarrassing, but it was a cute story! No hard feelings, I promise."

Robin's sympathetic grimace deepens.

"No," Eddie says, standing up straight. "I refuse. There is no way I turned down Steve Harrington for a New Year's kiss. There is no way."

"Wait—"

"Eddie, where—"

Eddie marches for the door, digging his keys out of his pockets. "Good-bye friends, I must go see a supergirl about time travel."

[ancientgoddessofegypt]

astro thoughts - short n sweet <3 pluto in the house

Pluto in the 1st house - Very strong auras. Could deliberately see through bs a mile away. Not gifted in being friendly, lol just kidding. Their not 'nice' though. And they don't have to be. They don't like faking the funk so this pretty much gives them an interesting outlook on people and they way they see themselves. Can shift the whole room with just their magic. Can be very intimidating to some, but very inspiring to others.

Pluto in the 2nd house - Could have financial issues from time to time. Not likely to say the same thing twice, if they said it once they meant it. Dont bother them again about it. These individuals can use their psychic senses to make money if that is what they wish, they could be very therapeutic to say the least. Give em a chance, they really wouldn't hurt a fly.

Pluto in the 3rd house - There speech is very compelling. They could hold a room with just their words and it could open the minds of a few listening to them. They have a gift in impacting you with just the way that they think, making you beg for more each day at a time.

Pluto in the 4th house - Could of had a transformative experience at home and I don't mean that nicely. There are somethings that should be left unsaid but sometimes things need a reawakening. They don't seem to let things go here.. but why would they? There past is like a haunting story awaiting to be unraveled just so you can piece together the puzzles that we're left unfinished. They are quiet when it comes to their personal life and hide themselves from the world so that you won't get an inkling of what truly is masked behind the bushes.

Pluto in the 5th house - Very deep bonds with their art work and can do a performance like no other. They will have you feeling every bit of emotion in their vibration just to help you feel what the character is feeling. I noticed there are a lot of good actors with this placement. Anywho, they have a powerful presence and when it comes to dating them or even just experiencing them for a little while it can be a transformative, healing experience for people involved with them.

Pluto in the 6th house - Like their martians mates in the 6th house, these people can have a pretty interesting experience here. They have a tendency to be obsessive over what they want so they work as much as they can until the wheels falls off. This could become a problem if they don't think to chill out on working and sacrificing their well being for something out side of themself.

Pluto in the 7th house - Deep, penetrating raw auras. Could be self-reflective on the way they see things, themselves , others and just the world at large. They have a gift of discernment but most of them never use the gift and can get caught up into the wrong things sometimes. There is more than what meets the eye with these individuals. They never let others in so easily, sometimes they're worth the wait. ;)

Pluto in the 8th house - Really good at seeing through things that others just can't seem to pick up on. Really gifted in occult sciences. Have issues with commitment and could have trouble with individuals because of traumatic experiences in past lives or current one. Could have people who want to be around them just to unravel them, but not really want to be with them. Have a very mysterious presence, hard to read.

Pluto in the 9th house - Very interesting and their thoughts can penetrate the mind in so many ways. They will leave you speechless when its all over. They travel to different places all the time but they are pretty good at finding places that match their flow, and love ot bring anyone along for the ride. There just a different layer to them that no one really knows how to explain, but its a gift that keeps giving.

Pluto in the 10th house - Woah. Thats the word to describe em. Its their touch and raw auras that keep you on your knees. VERY strong personas and do not like being talked down on. Could use their experiences/circumstances to their advantage. Gifted and seeing beyond what no one wants to believe is true. They can have the world if they know they got it in them already. Hard headed but gets to the bag with just their two feet. No one else can beat them at their own game.

Pluto in the 11th house - Whew. These people have a spell on the people that no other pluto house placement can compete with. The issue is these people don't know how to use that power but thats not all that bad. They can have people do things for them because something about them just makes people want to do things for them.

Pluto in the 12th house - very odd things comes out of the mind with these individuals. The subconscious/dream world is the most important part of their day to day because it rules the present in a way that cant be controlled but must be felt. How are you doing living a life that no one seems to live? It seems like they are all alone, but the world is calling for them to give them all the answers.

Talk to me in the comments, let me know how yall feelin! <3