#i always kind of thought of kind/polite/respectful as more of an affectation than a moral alignment with good

[naisaa]

wait i don't understand the distinction you're making with ragh barkrock (whoever she is) bc if your only requirement for who counts as a himbo is just "stupid hot guy" and he's also stupid and hot why doesn't he count?

are jock and himbo mutually exclusive categories? a stupid hot guy is a himbo but a stupid hot guy who likes sports is a jock and eternally banned from himboism, due to the sports? could a stupid hot jock become a himbo if he lost his passion for football? can a himbo just categorically not be into fitness too much lest he transform into a jock???

this is just Not True and i will die on the hill, screaming and shouting, that himbos can be willingly evil-aligned or even neutral-aligned.

[evieelyzabethh]

hiii i was wondering if you could do platonic Mel x reader headcanons? (like theyre friends and reader is on the council???)

thank youu and have a lovely day💗

omggg thank you! i always worry that everyone skips the mel sections. there is not nearly enough love for her, and she is literally my fav character

Contrary to popular belief, Mel is not a cold person in the slightest. She is certainly a bit hesitant to affection and softness, but it isn't unwelcome. When she first arrived in Piltover, freshly cast out by her own mother for her aversion to violence, she is very off balance. You don't become the richest person in Piltover in such a short period of time by being friendly, wealth is won through strategic kindness and an ability to play the long game.

It would be hard to crack that exterior at first, partially because she expects that everyone else is playing the same game she is. She thinks that the friendship is less soft and more professionally symbiotic. You scratch her back, she scratches yours kinda thing. And it's no reflection of who she thinks you are, she's not even aiming to form any personal judgements or get to know you outside of work, but politics is a performance. How genuinely you play your role is of little importance to her, as long as it benefits you both.

This being said, you are far more tolerable than the rest of them. Besides actually being her age, she respects the approach you have, you are always forthright with your goals, even if the plans you have to achieve them are under the table. You're consistent and she appreciates this. Though she understands the charade of smiles and civility, she knows that most of these people don't care about much other than keeping things exactly the way they are.

Early on in her journey in Piltover she doesn't care much about the fate of the Zaunites, this isn't her home, and that instability is one she is largely ignorant to and doesn't believe it's her responsibility to fix. She does want change. Is this desire to make waves to prove a point to her mother overseas, initially yes, but the point still stands that she wants to do something. That may be what she likes about you most. Not only that you want change, but you want it for yourself. You are here to represent your family, but you are so much more than a name. She admires that you want a legacy of your own, that your morals are your own, that your goals work toward a vision that you dreamt.

While she has Elora to remind her of home, she has you to help build her future in Piltover and figure out what she actually wants. As she warms up to you, you have somewhat of a mentor/apprentice type relationship, though far less formal. Besides teaching her of the culture, what happens in the Undercity, and your personal thoughts and opinions on the cycles of violence, you learn about Noxus. You learn about all the places she'd want to take you to, the difference in politics, how much more aggressive it is.

Mel is someone who usually keeps a calm and cool exterior but being friends with you allows her to break it down. Especially after days where she begins to wonder what she's even doing here, days where she just feels like a pawn still being moved around the board by her mother. She's good at the politics, but it's tiresome, still having to constantly play by someone else's rules. It dawns on her when you are the only person she can think of while sobbing alone in her all to big room that maybe you aren't just some work acquaintance.

Now that the very long introduction is out of the way, Mel is such a hugger. She is very physically affectionate; it's her way of catching up on all she missed out with her mom. She's the type to cradle your head in her hands and rub your back

She is also the 'break up with your boyfriend' friend. If your partner is not giving you what you deserve, she really doesn't see the point in continuing the relationship. She is truly baffled by the excuse 'but we've been together for x years, I can't leave them'. YES YOU CAN! AND YOU SHOULD! People are replaceable, she does not believe in remaining in the company of those you don't like, especially if it doesn't benefit you.

She was also robbed of a traditional sort of girlhood, so she adores those kinds of hangouts. So many sleepovers, except instead of junk food and soda, its wine and fancy charcuterie boards. Self-care nights involve super expensive skincare and a terrible movie playing. If you two get drunk enough, you may even get into a pillow fight and leave the room covered in down feathers and empty satin pillow covers.

Assuming she's still dating Jayce, you definitely know a bit too much about him. It's very hard looking him in the eye after being told about the time she caught him shirtless in a stupid pair of heart covered boxers.

She gifted you one of her paintings for your birthday one year and almost cried when you started crying. Her art was always more of a hobby to air out her big emotions and her heart practically bursts with happiness every time you enter a room. You hang it right over your bed for protection in your dreams and it makes her beam with pride that you love it so much.

She is also such a good gift giver in general. I think she'd be super into journaling and would have like a million of those things, one of them dedicated to her friends and their interests.

Speaking of her journals, I think she'd have one for different goals. For example, one for all the books she wants to read for the year and dedicated pages to rank them and give her opinions. Maybe one for all the places she wants to visit one day. You two would totally swap books and have a friendly competition with your reading goals

[dailyanarchistposts]

Undoing ideology

Rather than becoming rooted in a single ideological current, Alston points to the potential of affirming the most enabling parts of a multiplicity of currents. Similarly, when we interviewed Richard Day, he made a distinction between an ideological approach and an ethical one, like Alston’s:

Day: If someone is working ideologically, they will have a pat answer to any question that might be asked, without having to do much in the way of thinking or analysis. If you ask a liberal about smashing bank windows in a protest, they will probably say it’s violent and bad; if you ask an anarchist, they will probably say it’s not violence, it’s destruction of stolen property and quite a valid thing to do. This is similar to working morally, in that you need only consult a tablet, ask a functionary such as a priest, and they will tell you what to do and not do. In a critical, analytic—ethical—way of relating, it is impossible to know what one might think or feel ahead of time; that will be contingent upon many circumstances of the situation. There is likely to be much more complexity, much more nuance, less dogmatism, certainty, and purity. In general, I think it’s safe to associate ideological ways of relating with rigid radicalism, and that’s why you find that so many people, all over the world, who are actually involved in the most powerful social movements and upheavals, tend to steer away from ideology, and orient more to shared values, practices, and goals. Nick & carla: And not being ideological means being uncertain, as well, right? Day: Yeah. Working non-ideologically definitely involves an element of openness, a vulnerability, not only at the level of emotion, but also at the level of thought, and of political relationships. There is a certain sort of safety in having an answer for everything.[151]

As we insisted earlier, ethics here does not mean an individualized set of fixed principles (as in consumer ethics, or personal ethics) but instead a capacity to be attuned to the situation, to be immersed in it, and to create something emergent out of the existing conditions. Alston speaks to the power and potential of working across difference in ways that respect where people are coming from:

Different consciousnesses can come from different places … and we can figure out the dialog, how to create a way forward that respects us all, that respects the different worlds that we come from. So for me, if that had happened back then in 1970, where would we have been right now? And for me, that’s such a better way to go, ‘cause for the queer community, or the Yoruba community that may exist in Brooklyn, what’s best for them? Whether one is a small geographical community or tied to their ethnicity or dealing with a lifestyle, we should just be open to come together and see how we can do this in a different kind of way. That’s the challenge.[152]

This is the ethics of encounter. Instead of asking whether we (or they) are inherently radical, revolutionary, or anarchist, an ethical approach asks questions about how we affect each other, what new encounters become possible, and what we can do together. None of the answers to these questions can be known in advance. They can only be asked as part of an open-ended, unfolding experiment, as markers in an always-changing world, in which we figure things out along the way. As the anarchist collective Crimethinc writes,

If the hallmark of ideology is that it begins from an answer or a conceptual framework and attempts to work backward from there, then one way to resist ideology is to start from questions rather than answers. That is to say—when we intervene in social conflicts, doing so in order to assert questions rather than conclusions.

What is it that brings together and defines a movement, if not questions? Answers can alienate or stupefy, but questions seduce. Once enamored of a question, people will fight their whole lives to answer it. Questions precede answers and outlast them: every answer only perpetuates the question that begot it.[153]

We would add that an important complement to asking questions is being able to listen sincerely to responses, and to those with altogether different questions. The power of questions comes from people being able to respond and hear each other in new ways. It comes from hanging onto the uncertainties they generate, and the new potential that comes along with them. To undo ideology is not as straightforward as taking off a pair of glasses to see the world differently. To ward off ideology is not finally to see clearly, but to be disoriented, allowing things to emerge in their murkiness and complexity. It might mean seeing and feeling more, but often vaguely, like flickers in one’s peripheral vision, or strange sensations that defy familiar categories and emotions. It is an undoing of oneself, cutting across the grain of habits and attachments. To step out of an inherited ideology can be joyful and painful.

[daybringersol]

Hey ! I’m Sol, Juno, Chip or Art, whichever you prefer, and you can use he/him, eon/eons, myr/myrrh, hy/hymn, it/its and masculine terms for me. I’m a paradox, I don’t abide to labels and stuff like that, not in the way that I don’t use them, more in the way that I just go with what feels right in the moment, without forcing myself to stay static. Right now, I’m an anarchaqueer, biaro man, but I’m fluid, so don’t get attached too much ! I’m also québecois and not shy about it; feel free to talk to me in french or english.

more pronoun options [link]

read CROSSTALK [link]

art collection sideblog : @solsanctae

Working towards being an editor professionally, so open to beta for fics or other stories, just DM me !

I’m currently trying to cut back on political commentary on here, both in reblogs or in my own posts, because it triggers my moral OCD. Please note that you cannot extrapolate how much activism someone partakes in based on their tumblr activity.

I’m for the liberation of Palestine, against antitransmasculinity (as not being so would betray my own life experiences), for the independence of Québec, against antisemitism, for a kind of aspec solidarity that includes non-aroace aspecs and respects the differences in our experiences, against the police & the current psychiatric system, for the destigmatization of kinks, fetishes & ‘scary’ mental disorders, against exclusionism & label policing in the queer community, for the exploration of complex topics in fiction (including in ‘lowbrow’ medias like fanfiction), against both gender & sex essentialism & binaries, for LandBack, against the criminalisation of (all) drugs & sex work, and passionate about much more topics than those included in this short list. I believe that morality is not determined by your thoughts but by your actions, and that what kind of bigotry you’re affected by is not determined by your identity but by how & if it is perceived. If you’re planning on harassing me about any of these beliefs, I’d recommend simply blocking me instead, as I will not answer any questions I don’t believe to be asked in good faith.

I’m 21 so keep that in mind. There should be little NSFW stuff on here, pretty much only artistic nudity & jokes.

Please note that I do have a separate (appropriately tagged) NSFW account, and that if you go looking for it, it’s your fault for seeing things you don’t want to see. Bringing here what I post to that account, or ‘exposing’ it to others with the goal to judge or mock me is sexual harassment. There’s a reason those accounts are separate.

I’m fully fine with (appropriately tagged) NSFW topics being explored in fandom, including JRWI (as those same things are explored in the source material). I believe the council’s boundaries are to not do RPF and to not show them porn of their characters. Feel free to block me if that makes you uncomfortable.

I’m not going to tag every time I talk about my own experiences with abuse, addiction, SA, C-PTSD, pure O (internal OCD, in my case moral), P-DID and stuff like that, so feel free to block if that’s something that could trigger you. I don’t talk about it often though, and will tag it if it’s too graphic.

I am the host of a system, this account should be mine & mine only but we’ll see. The way I see my plurality is not the generally agreed upon way in the plural community (e.g. I am my body; the others are at best symbiotes, at worst parasites), so don’t think I represent anyone else but myself. Don’t ask me to have an opinion on endogenic systems, I don’t care.

If you tag me in stuff where you have to tag your friends and then they tag their friends, I enjoy and appreciate it, but I most likely won’t tag other people cuz it makes me anxious !

I usually do PTs, IDs and/or alt text on my flags and userboxes but I don’t always have the energy that requires of me, so sorry about that.

Flags : No credits needed, except if put on a wiki or pinterest, in which case credits are needed (preferably a link).

Userboxes : No credits needed, but reblog the post you got it from.

Visual arts : No reposting, but can be used as pfp/banner with credits.

Poetry : Reposting is fine, but with credits.

[narconfessions]

Not dark per se, but definitely a NPD confession that I dont feel I can share elsewhere.

I actually Do want to collect "oppression points." I like being part of marginalized groups because it makes me feel special and being the victim in situations makes brain go brr. I dont go so far as faking things to feel oppressed, but I do take pleasure in being plural/disabled/queer/trans/cluster B/autistic/a trauma survivor/etc (which I am) partly because I like feeling special.

(Disclaimer this is not to say that discrimination and hatred based on these things does not affect me negatively. I do experience and struggle with ableism and queerphobia and other things.)

i can't believe my eyes because i genuinely thought no one else felt this way and im so relieved to know im not the only one. this is tough with my severe impulsivity too because sometimes i impulsively come out in situations where i KNOW i'm not safe just because i impulsively want attention and sympathy.

i think the problem with the whole thing surrounding "oppression points" is that most often, it's just a term pulled out by marginalized people who have fallen into the trap of respectability politics, to describe people who don't fit their worldview. for example, autistic people who i've seen shit on autigender people because "IM autistic and IIIII understand gender so why can't you". and just look at the endless cycle of exclusionism within the queer community. it's always that we "just want oppression points to be special" but the whole problem in the first place is that we've made oppression out to be something special in the first place! the online world has placed a hierarchy on who is coolest and most valuable based on how many marginalized identities they have. we've created this idea that being marginalized is "cool". sure, it can be a big part of your identity but i've met so many people online who genuinely believed they were cooler and more interesting than cishets just by virtue of having a different gender modality or sexuality and i've also met so so many cishets and guys whose mental health has genuinely plummetted because they think they are not cool because they have no or very few marginalized identities and it's like. being gay or trans or nd or disabled IS cool, but it's not what MAKES YOU COOL! no one is inherently better than anyone else based on unchangeable aspects of their identity because your morality is based on what you choose and how you act, not just who you are. i'm not saying "aw boohoo white cishets are so oppressed" because that's bullshit, but i do think it's ridiculous how much we've turned marginalization into a competition of cool points. you can have as much pride in your marginalized identity as you want but you are not morally better just by virtue of being an Oppressed Person. so that's why this whole "oppression points" thing has taken off and instead of criticizing the hierarchy of oppression-based worth and value that's contributed to it, people just blame other marginalized people for being the "wrong" kind of queer or nd. there's nothing wrong with liking having multiple marginalizations and enjoying the attention from it, it's just when it becomes, like you said, something that people take as paradigm for peoples value or "coolness" and fake stuff because they think it'll make them cooler, when it's a problem like babe no! you are not a boring person just cuz you're cis or straight or nt or abled or white or whatever you have a personality and a life and a value. if people realized that they had value outside of societal checklists and boxes, then people making fun of other marginalized people for being supposed "fakers wanting oppression points" will die down. (none of this is said to invalidate you it's just my take on the nuance of the whole 'oppression points' thing.)

[classicslesbianopinions]

Antigone is such a frustrating character to me because yeah her morals are admirable and stuff but it’s like she makes it her entire personality and somewhat it becomes more about her sense of superiority and less about her brother. Like she sort of tells her sister that she’s better than her because she’s willing to die for their brother whilst her sister isn’t and this is why I was never fully moved by that play and that character. She finds so much pride in her death that at the end of it I can’t fully be sad for her because it’s exactly what she wanted and what became the point of her whole existence and identity

interesting! there are a few things i would say to that-- first of all, the whole thing with tragedy is that death (or a horrible end of some kind) is part of the fabric of the genre. i think antigone is very genre-aware-- she knows that her family's cursed, and she knows that she is also subject to it. oedipus rex, oedipus at colonus, and antigone, sophocles' three tragedies about oedipus's family, all take place within her lifetime, and she knows her family is cursed. i would assume she knows (or thinks) from a young age that the outlook is not good.

it's also important to remember that her determination to bury her brother is very religiously motivated-- she wants him to have the appropriate funeral rituals so that he's respected in the eyes of the gods. this is why i'm always saying antigone is a very religious play. it's also very political, and there's some really interesting gender stuff going on in the context of ancient athens, but if i get into that i'll be here all night.

anyway, i don't know if either of the above paragraphs affect your opinion, but it's important for context.

and her argument with her sister is part of what makes her feel very real to me? part of what i like about the play is that it feels very real despite being so very separate from me in terms of both time and place. i feel like i can understand the characters despite living thousands of years later and reading the play in translation or in a second language. antigone and ismene both were raised in their family's trauma. they saw their mother die and their father gouge out his eyes as small children, and then in addition to all that trauma had to take care of their father until his death. and again they grew up knowing their family was cursed. they're foils, reacting differently to the same trauma. which is why the argument between them is so compelling: they've both reacted very differently to the same circumstances, and they're both right in a way.

and of course that's also why antigone feels so much like a teenager to me. because what she's doing isn't wise, ismene is right that she's going to get hurt, but she can't see that far ahead, and the only important thing to her is making sure her brother gets buried. their sibling dynamic feels very real to me, to be honest.

and then within the plot of the play, she serves the purpose of being opposition to creon. regardless of whether or not you like her or find her relatable or anything, her role in the play is important to the overall arc and message-- creon needs to go through the experience of being challenged and refusing to bend and losing everyone he loves as a result. if antigone as a character were any different, the tragedy of the play would fall apart.

so yeah obviously you don't have to like antigone as a play or as a character, but these are my thoughts on what you've brought up! i think the things that frustrate you about her are also the reasons the tragedy works in a way.

[pumpkinpaix]

Pleeeeeeease get into the class one at some point because I very much want to understand the class dynamics happening in the story but I have yet to find a meta that dives into it

god anon you want me dead don’t you alsjdfljks

referring to this post

okay, so -- my specific salt about class interpretations in mdzs are very targeted. I can’t pretend to have a deep understanding of how class works in mdzs generally because uhhhhh yeah i don’t think i have that. i’m just not familiar enough with the genre and/or the particulars of chinese class systems. but! i can talk in general terms as to why I feel a certain way about the class dynamics that I do think I understand and how I think they relate to the themes of the novel! i’m gonna talk about wei wuxian, the daozhangs, xue yang, and 3zun with, I’m sure, a bunch of digressions along the way.

the usual disclaimers: i do not think you are a bad person if you hold opinions contrary to my own. i may disagree with you very strongly, but like. this isn’t a moral judgment, fandom is transformative and interpretive etc. etc. and i may change my mind. who knows what the future will bring!

OKAY so let’s begin!

here’s the thing about wei wuxian: he’s not poor. I think because characters use “son of a servant” kind of often when they’re trying to insult him, a lot of people latch onto that and think that it’s a much stronger indication of his societal status than it actually is. iirc, most of the insults that fall along the “son of a servant” line come after wei wuxian starts breaking severely from tradition. it’s a convenient thing to attack him for, but doesn’t actually indicate anything about his wealth. (exception: yu ziyuan, but that’s a personal familial issue) this is in direct contrast to jin guangyao who is constantly mocked for his family line, publicly and privately, no matter what he does.

so this, coupled with all the jokes about wwx never having any money (wei wuqian, sizhui’s “i’ve long since known you had no money” etc.), plus his like, rough years on the street as a child ends up producing this interpretation of wei wuxian, especially in modern aus, as someone who is very class conscious and “eat the rich”. but the fact of the matter is, wei wuxian IS rich. aside from the years in his childhood and the last two years of his life in yiling, like -- wei wuxian had money and status. he is gentry. he is respected as gentry. he is treated as a son by the sect leader of yunmeng jiang -- he does not have the jiang name, but it is so very clear that jiang fengmian favors him. wei wuxian is ranked fourth of all the eligible young masters in the cultivation world -- that is not a ranking he could have attained without being accepted into the upper class.

wei wuxian’s poverty does not affect him in the way that it affects jin guangyao or xue yang. he is of low-ish birth (still the son of jiang fengmian’s right hand man though! ok sure, “son of a servant” but like. >_> whatever anyways), but for most of his life he had money. he, jiang cheng, and their sect brothers go into town and steal lotus pods with the understanding that “jiang-shushu will pay for it”. this is a regular thing! that’s fucking rich kid behavior!!! wei wuxian is careless with money because he doesn’t have to worry about it. he still has almost all the benefits of being upper class: education, food security, respect, recognition etc. I think there may also be a misconception that wei wuxian was always on the verge of being kicked out by yu ziyuan, or that he was constantly walking on eggshells around her for fear of being disowned, but that is just textually untrue. i could provide receipts, but I admittedly don’t really feel like digging them up just now ;;

even in his last years in yiling, he was not the one who was dealing with the acute knowledge of poverty: wen qing is the one managing the money, and as far as we know, wei wuxian did little to no management of daily life during the burial mounds days -- mostly, he’s described as hiding in his cave for days on end, working on his inventions, running around like a force of chaos, frivolously making a mess of things -- it’s very very cute that he buries a’yuan in the dirt, but in classic wei wuxian fashion, he did Not think about the practical consequences of it -- that A’Yuan has no other clean clothes, and now he’s gotten this set dirty and has no intention of washing them. is this a personality thing? yeah, but I think it’s also indicative of his lack of concern over the logistics of everyday survival, re: wealth.

furthermore, i think it is important to remember that wei wuxian, when he is protecting the wen remnants, is not protecting common folk: he is still protecting gentry. fallen gentry, yes! but gentry nonetheless. wen qing was favored by wen ruohan, and wen ning himself says that he has a retinue of people under his command (the remnants, essentially). their branch of the family do not have the experience of living and growing in poverty -- they are impoverished and persecuted in their last years, but that’s a very different thing from being impoverished your whole life. (sidenote: I do not believe wei wuxian’s primary motivation for defending the wen remnants was justice -- i believe he did it because he felt he owed wen ning and wen qing a life debt, and once he was there, he wasn’t going to stand around and let the work camps go on. yes, he is concerned about justice and doing the right thing, but that’s not why he went in the first place. anyways, that’s another meta)

after wei wuxian returns, he then marries back into gentry, and very wealthy gentry at that. lwj provides him all the money he could ever want, he is never worried about going homeless, starving, being denied opportunities based on his class and accompanying disadvantages. who would dare? and neither wei wuxian nor lan wangji seem to have much interest in shaking up the order of things, except in little things like the way they teach the juniors. they live in gusu, under the auspices of the lan, and they live a happy, domestic life.

were his years on the street traumatizing? yes, of course they were, there’s so much delicious character exploration to be done re: wei wuxian’s relationship to food, his relationship to his own needs, and his relationship to the people he loves. it’s all important and good! but I feel very strongly that that experience, while it was formative for him, did not impart any true understanding of poverty and the common person’s everyday struggles, nor do I think he ever really gains that understanding. he is observant and canny and aware of class and blood, certainly, but not in a way that makes it his primary hill to die on (badum-tss).

this is in very stark contrast to characters like jin guangyao and xue yang, and to some extent, xiao xingchen and song lan. I’ll start with the daozhangs, because I think they’re the simplest (??).

I think both xiao xingchen and song lan have class consciousness, but in a very simplified, broad-strokes kind of way (at least, given the information we know about them). we know that the two of them share similar values and want to one day form their own sect that gives no weight to the nobility of your lineage and has no concern with your wealth. we also know that they both disdain intersect politics and are more concerned with ideals and principles rather than status. but, I think because of that, this actually somewhat limits their perception and understanding of how status is used to oppress. as far as we know, neither of them participated on any side in sunshot and they demonstrate much more interest in relating to the commoners. honestly, i hc that they were flitting around trying to help decimated towns, protecting defenseless villages etc. I ALSO think this has a lot of interesting potential in terms of xiao xingchen and wei wuxian’s relationship, if xiao xingchen is ever revived. regardless of whether you’re in CQL or novel verse, xiao xingchen really doesn’t know wei wuxian at all, other than knowing that he’s his shijie’s son. he knows that cangse-sanren met with a tragic end, like yanling-daoren before her, and that he wants to be different. but here is cangse-sanren’s son, laying waste to entire cities, desecrating the dead. I would very much like to get into xiao xingchen’s head during that period of time (and i think, if i do it right, i can write some of it into the songxiao fixit), but that’s neither here nor there, because i’ve wandered off from my point again.

i would posit that song lan is used to an ascetic lifestyle, and xiao xingchen probably is too -- but that’s different from poverty because there’s an element of choice to it. I also think that neither of them is particularly worldly, xiao xingchen especially. he lived on an isolated mountain until he was like, seventeen, and he came down full of ideals and naivete about how the world worked. I think that both of them see inequality, that they are angered by it, and that they want to do something about it -- but their solution is neither to topple the sects, nor is it to reform the system. rather, it seems to be more about withdrawing and creating their own removed world. I think that the daozhangs embody a kind of utopianism that isn’t present in the minds of any of the other characters, not even wangxian. honestly, baoshan-sanren’s mountain is a utopian ideal, but one that is not described. it exists outside of and beyond the world. i have a lot of jumbled, vague thoughts about utopianism generally, mostly informed by china miéville and ursula k. le guin, and I don’t think i have the ability to articulate them here, but i wanted to. hm. say something? there is something about the inherent dystopianism contained within every utopia, that utopias are necessary, but also reflections of the existence of terrible things in their conception. idk. there’s something in there, I know it!! but i suppose what I want to say is -- i do not think the daozhangs understand class and social hierarchy very deeply because they don’t see a need to examine it deeply. for their goals, the details aren’t the point. they’re not looking to reform within the system, they’re looking to build something outside of it. I think they spend a lot of time concerned with alleviating the symptoms of social oppression, and their values reflect the injustices they witness there.

regardless, even if their story ends in tragedy and there is a certain amount of critique re: the utopian approach, i think the text still emphasizes that xiao xingchen left a utopia and that he thought that people mattered enough for him to try, and that was an incredibly honorable, kind, and human thing to do.

YEAH SURE THE DAOZHANGS ARE THE SIMPLEST ok ok RETURNING to class and moving forward: xue yang.

i also don’t think xue yang has class consciousness lol, or not in any way that really matters, but I do think poverty impacted him in a much stronger way than it impacted wei wuxian. wei wuxian spent some years on the street as a child. xue yang grew up on the streets. chang ci’an’s horrific treatment of him was directly due to his class and social standing: chang ci’an is a nobleman and xue yang is not even worth the dirt beneath the wheels of his cart. what I think is the seminal point though, is that this does not make xue yang think particularly deeply about systemic injustice, because xue yang is so self-centered, self-driven, and individualistic. he is not even slightly concerned about how poverty and class might affect other people -- they’re other people. what he takes away from his experience is not an anger at being wrongfully cheated by a system, but an anger at being wrongfully cheated by a specific man.

xue yang is not particularly concerned with the politics of the aristocracy -- he has no obvious ambitions other than, “i want to eat sweets whenever i please”, “i want to hurt anyone who wrongs me”, and “i want to be so strong that no one can hurt me”. like, he just doesn’t care -- it’s not the kind of power he wants. he sneers at people for like, personal reasons, not class reasons -- “you think you’re better than me” re: xiao xingchen and song lan. to him, all people -- poor, wealthy, noble, common -- are essentially equal, and they are all beneath him. after all, what does he care what family someone comes from, how much money they have? everyone bleeds when you cut them. some of them might be harder to get to than others, but xue yang does not fear that sort of thing. it’s just another obstacle he needs to vault on his way to getting revenge and/or a pastry.

ANYWAYS onto jin guangyao (wow this is hm. getting rather long ahaha oh dear): I would argue that the two characters with the most acute understanding of class/societal politics and the injustice of them are jin guangyao and lan xichen. i’ll start with jin guangyao for obvious reasons.

where xue yang took the damaging effects of poverty as personal slights, I think jin guangyao is painfully aware that there is nothing personal about them, which is, in some ways, much worse. why are two sons, born on the same day to the same father, treated so differently? just because.

he watched his mother struggle and starve and work herself to the bone in a profession where she was constantly disrespected and abused for almost nothing in return, while his father could have lifted her out of poverty with the wave of a finger. why didn’t he? because he didn’t like her? no -- because he didn’t care, and the structures of the society they live in protect that kind of blase treatment of the lower class.

“so my mother couldn’t choose her own fate, is that her fault?” jin guangyao demands. he knows that he is unbelievably talented, that he has ambition, that he has potential, and that all of it is beyond his grasp just because his father didn’t want to bother with it. his mother’s life was destroyed, and his own opportunities were crippled with that negligence. it isn’t personal. that’s just the way things are. your individual identity is meaningless, your humanity does not exist. when he’s kicked down the steps of jinlin tai, it’s just more confirmation that no matter how talented or hardworking he is, no one will give him the time of day unless he finds a way to take it himself and become someone who “matters”.

jin guangyao’s cultivation is weak because he had a poor foundation, and he had a poor foundation because he was denied access to a good one. he copies others because that’s all he can do at this point, and he copies so well that he can hold his own against some of the strongest cultivators of his generation. he’s disparaged for copying and “stealing” techniques, but -- he never would have had to if only he had been born/accepted into the upper class. the fact is that i really do think jin guangyao was the most promising cultivator of his generation that we meet, including the twin jades and wei wuxian: he had natural talent, ambition, creativity, determination and cunning in spades. in some ways, I think that’s one of the overlooked tragedies of jin guangyao: the loss of not just the good man he could have been, but the powerful one too. imagine what he could have done.

jin guangyao spends his entire time in the world of the aristocracy feeling unsteady and terrified because he knows exactly how precarious his position is. he knows how easy it is to lose power, especially for someone like him. he’s working against so many disadvantages, and every scrap of honor he gets is a vicious battle. jin guangyao fears, and I think that’s something that’s lacking in xue yang, wei wuxian and the daozhangs’ experiences/understandings of poverty. i think it’s precisely that fear that emphasizes jin guangyao’s understanding of class and blood. jin guangyao exhibits an anxiety that neither wei wuxian nor xue yang do, and it’s because he truly knows how little he is worth in the eyes of society and how little there is he can do to change that. to me, it very much feels related to the anxiety of not knowing if tomorrow you’ll have something to eat, if tomorrow you’ll still have a home, if tomorrow someone will destroy you and never have to answer for it. it’s the anxiety of knowing helplessness intimately.

moreover, jin guangyao is the only person shown to use the wealth and power at his disposal to take concrete steps to actually help the common people typically ignored by the powerful -- the watchtowers. they’re described in chapter 42. it’s a system that is designed to cover remote areas that most cultivators are reluctant to go due to their inconvenience and the lack of means of the people who live there. the watchtowers assign cultivators to different posts, give aid to those previously forgotten, and if the people are too poor to pay what the cultivators demand, the lanling jin sect pays for it. jin guangyao worked on this for five years and burned a lot of bridges over it. people were strongly opposed to it, thinking that it was some kind of ploy for lanling jin’s personal benefit. but the thing is -- it worked. they were effective. people were helped.

i believe CQL frames the watchtowers as an allegory for a surveillance state/centralized control (i think?? it’s been a minute -- that’s the hazy impression i remember, something like a parallel to the wen supervisory offices?), but I personally don’t think that was the intent in the novel. the watchtowers are a public good. lanling jin doesn’t staff them with their own sect members -- they get nearby sects to staff them. it’s a warning network that they fund that’s supposed to benefit everyone, even those that everyone had considered expendable.

(did jin guangyao do terrible things to achieve this goal? yeah lol. it’s not confirmed, but his son sure did die... suspiciously...... at the hands of an outspoken critic of the watchtowers........ whom he then executed....... so like, maybe just a convenient coincidence for jin guangyao, two birds one stone, but. it seems. Unlikely.)

lan xichen is the only member of the gentry that ever shows serious compassion for and nuanced understanding of jin guangyao’s circumstances. lan xichen treats him as his equal regardless of jin guangyao’s current status -- even when he was meng yao, lan xichen treated him as a human being worthy of respect, as someone with great merits, as someone he would choose as a friend, but he did so knowing full well the delicate position meng yao occupied. this is in direct contrast to nie mingjue, who also believed that meng yao was worthy of respect as a human being, but was completely unable to comprehend the complexities of his circumstances and unwilling to grant him any grace. you know, the difference between “i acknowledge that your birth and status have had effects upon you, but I don’t think less of you for it” and “i don’t consider your birth and status at all when i interact with you because i think it is irrelevant” (“i don’t see color” anyone?)

to illustrate, from chapter 48:

大抵是觉得娼妓之子身上说不定也带着什么不干净的东西，这几名修士接过他双手奉上来的茶盏后，并不饮下，而是放到一边，还取出雪白的手巾，很难受似的，有意无意反复擦拭刚才碰过茶盏的手指。聂明玦并非细致之人，未曾注意到这种细节，魏无羡却用眼角余光扫到了这些。孟瑶视若未见，笑容不坠半分，继续奉茶。蓝曦臣接过茶盏之时，抬眸看他一眼，微笑道：“多谢。”

旋即低头饮了一口，这才继续与聂��玦交谈。旁的修士见了，有些不自在起来。

rough tl:

Probably because they believed that the son of a prostitute might also carry some unclean things upon his person, after these few cultivators took the teacups offered from [Meng Yao’s] two hands, they did not drink, but instead put them to one side, and furthermore brought out snow white handkerchiefs. Quite uncomfortably, and whether they were aware of it or not, they repeatedly wiped the fingers they had just used to touch the teacups. Nie Mingjue was not a detail-oriented person and never took note of such particulars, but Wei Wuxian caught these in the corner of his eye. Meng Yao appeared as if he had not seen, his smile unwavering in the slightest, and continued to serve tea. When Lan Xichen took the teacup, he glanced up at him and, smiling, said, “Thank you.”

He immediately dipped his head to take a sip, and only then continued to converse with Nie Mingjue. Seeing this, the nearby cultivators began to feel somewhat uneasy.

all right, since we’re in full cyan-rampaging-through-the-weeds mode at this point, i’m going to talk about how this is one of my favorite 3zun moments in the entire novel for characterization purposes because it really highlights how they all relate to one another, and to what degree each of them is aware of their own position in relation to the others and society as a whole.

1. nie mingjue, who is a forthright and blunt person, sets meng yao to serving tea and is done with it. he notices nothing wrong or inappropriate about the reactions of the people in the room because it’s not the sort of thing he considers important.

2. meng yao, knowing that his only avenue is to take it lying down with a smile, masks perfectly.

3. lan xichen, noticing all this, uses his own reputation to achieve two things at once: pointedly shame the other cultivators in attendance, and show meng yao that regardless of others’ opinions, he considers him an equal and does not endorse such behavior--and he does it while taking care that no fallout will come down on meng yao’s head.

is this yet another installment of cyan’s endless lxc defense thesis? why yes it is! no one is surprised! but this is my whole point: both meng yao and lan xichen understand the respective hierarchy and power dynamics within the room, while nie mingjue very much does not. this is not because nie mingjue is a bad person or because nie mingjue is stupid--it’s a combination of personality and upbringing. nie mingjue is straightforward and has no patience for such games. but then again, he can afford not to play because he was born into such a high position: that’s a privilege.

to break it down: meng yao knows that he is the lowest-ranked person in the room, sees the way people are subtly disrespecting him in full view of his general who is doing nothing about it. in some ways, this is good -- nie mingjue’s style of dealing with conflict is very direct and not at all suited to delicate political maneuvering. after all, the way he promoted meng yao was actually quite dangerous to meng yao: he essentially guaranteed that his men would bear meng yao a grudge and that their disrespect for him would only be compounded by their bitterness at being punished on his behalf. (it’s like, why often getting parents or teachers to intervene ineffectively in bullying can just be an incitement to more bullying -- same concept) meng yao’s reaction during that scene shows that he’s pretty painfully aware of this and is trying to defuse the situation to no avail. nie mingjue gives him a bootstrap speech (rip nie mingjue i love u so much but. sir) and then promotes him, which is pretty much the only saving grace of that entire exchange, for meng yao at least.

lan xichen, on the other hand, understands both that meng yao is the lowest-ranked person in the room and that any direct attempt to chastise the other cultivators in the room will only serve to hurt meng yao in the long run. he knows that if this were brought to nie mingjue’s attention, he would be outraged and not shy about it -- also bad for meng yao. so he uses what he has: his immaculate reputation. by acting contrary to the other cultivators’ behavior, he demonstrates that he finds their actions unacceptable but with the plausible deniability that it wasn’t directed at them, that this is just zewu-jun being his usual generous self. this means that the other cultivators have no one to blame but themselves, nothing to do but question their own actions. there is nowhere to cast off their discomfort. meng yao didn’t do anything. lan xichen didn’t do anything -- he just thanked meng yao and drank his tea, isn’t that what it’s there for? he doesn’t disrupt the peace, he doesn’t attack anyone and put them on the defensive, but he does make his position very clear.

i know this is a really small thing and i’m probably beating it to death, but I really think this shows just how cognizant lan xichen is of politics and emotional cause and effect in such situations. certainly, out of context I think the scene reads kind of cliche, but within the greater narrative of the story and within the arc of these characters specifically, I think it was a really smart scene to include. it also showcases lan xichen’s style of action: that he moves around and with a problematic situation as opposed to moving straight through.

not to be salty on main again, but this is why it’s very frustrating to me when I see people call lan xichen passive when he is anything but. his actions just don’t look like traditional “actions”, especially to an american audience. it’s easy to understand lan wangji and wei wuxian’s style of problem-solving: taking a stand, moving through, staying strong. lan xichen is juggling an inconceivable number of factors in any given situation, weighing his responsibilities in one role against those in another, and then trying to find the path through the thicket that will cause the least harm, both to himself and the thicket. lan wangji and wei wuxian are not particularly good at considering the far-reaching consequences of their actions -- again, not because they are bad people, but because of a combination of personality and upbringing. they’d just hack through the thicket, not thinking about the creatures that live in it. that is not a terrible thing! it isn’t. it’s a different way of approaching a problem, and it has different priorities. that’s okay. there are advantages and disadvantages on both sides, and where you come down is going to depend on your personal values.

okay we’ve spiraled far and away from my original point, but let’s circle back: i was talking about class.

I think it’s undeniable that class, birthright, fate etc. are some of the driving forces of thematic conflict in mdzs, and the way each character interacts with those forces reveals a lot about themselves and also about the larger themes of fate, chance, and what it means to be righteous and good and how that is and isn’t rewarded. a lot of the tragedy of mdzs (the tragedy that isn’t caused by direct aggression on the part of one group or another) stems from the injustices and slights that people suffered due to their lot in life. it isn’t fair. none of it is fair! we sympathize with jin guangyao because we recognize that what he suffered was unconscionable, even if we don’t excuse him. i sympathize A Lot with xue yang as well for similar reasons, though I understand that’s a harder sell. this is a story focused on the mistakes of an entrenched, aging gentry and the effects that those mistakes had on their children, and a lot of it has to do with prejudice based in class and birth status. whether the prejudice was the true reason or whether it was just a convenient excuse, the fact remains that the systems in place rewarded and protected the people in power who used it to cling to that power. mdzs is also a story of how the circumstances of one’s life can offer you impossible choices that you cannot abstain from, and it asks us to be compassionate to the people who made terrible choices in terrible times. it’s about the inherent complexity in all things! that sometimes, there are no good choices, and i don’t know, i’d like to think that people would show me compassion if I had to make the choices some of these characters did. not just wei wuxian, mind you, every single one of them. except jin guangshan because I Do Hate Him sorry. and i guess wen ruohan. i think that’s it.

good. GOD this is clocking in at //checks notes -- just over 5k. 8′D *stuffs some weeds into my mouth like the clown i am*

(ko-fi? :’D *lies down*)

[roguetelepaths]

Behind the Curtain Waits a Darker World

Fandom: Star Trek (concepts mostly from DS9) Genre: Angst Words: 868 Characters: Zara (OC), Tayli-4 (OC) Summary: Zara records a message, and has second thoughts about it.

Read on AO3 | @flashfictionfridayofficial​

Want to be on the taglist? Send an ask or a DM to be notified about future updates!

For once, and as usual, Zara was the one left alone with their thoughts. 

They’d been thinking a lot about this arrangement. Nothing about it seemed like coincidence. Tayli knew what they were, even if she didn’t know she knew– that much was obvious from the beginning– and more than that, she knew where they were going. The astrometric chart she’d downloaded from her ship had done something to them, stoked an instinctive longing in their soul that hadn’t been there before. It was as if she’d been sent there to lead them home.

Which was ridiculous. Of course it was ridiculous. They could think of a thousand other conclusions that seemed more likely. (Most of which, they’d thought of already, and disproven.) 

On its own, the idea that Tayli was there to play some part in leading them home seemed benevolent, if a bit superstitious. But when put together with everything else about Tayli, it started to seem decidedly less so. It was unlikely that they were the only one of their kind, especially considering the draw that the Omarion Nebula seemed to hold for them. Other creatures had migratory instincts, other creatures had homelands, and even if they weren’t anything like other creatures they knew of, they could still draw conclusions about what their instincts meant. So, clearly, there must also be others of Tayli’s kind. But did they all act like this? What reason would her people have to fear and respect theirs so deeply that even complete loss of memory couldn’t erase it? 

They didn’t want to think too hard about the answers to those questions. But if they were right, then who knew what taking her home would do to her? So with that in mind, there was only one morally right thing to do. 

“Computer, begin recording,” they said, just loud enough for the computer to hear and respond to their command. And then, after internally debating on the right way to phrase it, they began their message. “Tayli, I want you to know that if I had any other choice, I wouldn’t be doing this. Traveling with you has… well, it’s helped me learn about myself, and it’s helped me realize just how lonely I was for all those years of trying to do it on my own. But I don’t think we can keep going down this road together.”

Yeah, they thought. Don’t waste any time, just get it all out in the open. That’ll definitely work. It’s not like I’m recording this message for someone whose entire communication style is based around polite deflections. 

“Where I’m going– where I’m pretty sure I’m going– I don’t think it’s someplace that’s safe for you to follow. Which, like, I know that’s a ridiculous thing to say, since it’s thanks to you that I know where I’m going at all.” They took a deep breath, despite not needing to breathe. One of the many humanoid affectations that they’d absorbed over the years. “But I’m not stupid. I know you’re– I know I– look, it’s difficult to explain, but you can’t come with me, and any reason I try to give for it will make me look like a raving maniac. So you just need to trust me. Do what you’ve always done and trust me. Okay?”

With every word, the prospect of a future without Tayli cemented itself in their mind. What would they even do? What were they, in the complete absence of other life? And what would it do to her, to be severed from them so abruptly?

No. Don’t try to make this about her. You’re keeping her around for your own benefit and you know it, they chastised themself. Did they truly think of her as a friend, or had they grown so used to having a dutiful, obedient attendant at their beck and call that they couldn’t bear to let her go? You want to be selfless? You want to protect her? Protect her from you. 

“I’m sorry. Genuinely, I am. I don’t want to do this any more than you do. But if I were a good person, I would’ve done this a long time ago.” They rested their head in their hands, no more certain that this was the right choice than they were before. “But I’ve seen how you get when I show even the slightest indication that we might be better apart, so I guess we’re fucked no matter what I do,” they said bitterly. It was a horrible, selfish thing to keep her on at this point. But it was equally as selfish to leave her, knowing what it would do to her. 

So, if there was no right decision, that meant they had freedom to make the wrong one. 

“You know what? No. I can’t do that to you. To either of us. You’re coming with me, and I’m… if I’m right, I’ll find some way to protect you from whatever’s waiting for us when we get there. But I can’t leave you. Not for your sake, and definitely not for mine.” 

They stood up, turning to leave the room. “Computer, delete recording. I don’t want to think about this anymore.”

[warrioreowynofrohan]

My previous post on unselfishness in characters in characters also has a lot to do with my feelings towards characters in The Untamed. [I’ve only watched the show, not read the book - and I know I can sometimes get annoyed at people’s analyses of Lord of the Rings movie characters, when they aren’t in line with the book - so if you’re an MDZS fan and not a show fan, please ignore me.] Lan Xichen and Lan Wangji are two of my favourite characters, and a lot of it because, well, they aren’t particularly inclined to get their drama all over everyone else. When someone who Lan Xichen cares about deeply is accused of terrible crimes, he doesn’t rage and storm and get horribly offended; he carries out a thorough i vestigation, follows the leads he’s given, places all his resources at the disposal of the people making the accusations, and then, when it looks convincing, goes to talk to his friend and see if he has any posdible other explanation. He’s calm and systematic. And he’s kind to people - to Meng Yao, to Wei Wuxian, particularly during the Gusu Lan Training arc - who he has no personal connection with, simply because that’s the sort of person he is; kind in a thoughtful, considerate, undramatic way. He’s a dilpomat, he’s a conciliator, he believes in and values forbearance and mercy.

Lan Wangji might have a lot going on internally, but he’s going to focus on dealing with the Yin Iron because that’s what matters, a lot more than this weird crush he’s apparently developed. On the occasions he chooses to support Wei Wuxian and is punished for it, he accepts that without objection. After Wei Wuxian’s death, he becomes the main teacher of the Lan students and the one who leads them on cultivation missions; he doesn’t let his grief stop him from doing things that need to be done.

Wei Wuxian, by contrast, positively exhults in getting his drama all over everyone else. It took me a while to warm up to him because he was just - so - aggravating during the Gusu Lan arc. You’re attending what are apparently very prestigious lectures that everyone values the opportunity to take! You shouldn’t make excuses and throw blame around when you screw up! You shouldn’t goof off and be deliberately disruptive! (Some people are trying to learn, Wuxian!) You shouldn’t blatantly break the rules and then complain about there being consequences! In fact, as we see later, Wei Wuxian is an incredibly and perhaps pathologically self-sacrificing person - in the same way that he plays up minor injuries, discomfort, and sadness, only to hide the large ones, he combines being a nuisance in the small matters with being a deeply principled person in the great ones. This does, however, sabotage him to an extent, because people who don’t know him can’t distinguish between “Wei Wuxian is arrogant and making trouble for lulz again” (and to be clear - he is arrogant and he does make trouble for lulz) and “Wei Wuxian is making a stand on principle”.

And then we have Jiang Cheng, Drama King. He is the polar opposite of the Lans. If Jiang Cheng has a problem, everyone in Jiang Cheng’s vicinity also has that problem. His personal issues, obsessions and hang-ups cannot be set aside from the rest of his life or from what needs to be done; they suffuse everything he does. He cannot be impartial; he cannot consider things from outside his point of view, and endeavour to set his biases aside. If the Lans are admirable in both personality and character, and Wei Wuxian is aggravating in personality (by his culture’s standards - and often mine) but with strong character, and Jin Guangyao has an ideal personality (by his culture’s standards - polite, diplomatic, accomodating, dignified, organized, meticulous) and bad character, Jiang Cheng is the worst of both worlds. His character is deep attachment to what is close to him, and unconcern for the moral value of people outside his sphere (as when he says Wei Wuxian should have let the other cultivators die rather than anger the Wens; as when he tells Wei Wuxuan to abandon the people who saved both their lives - and Yanli’s life - to be killed). His personality is a giant mess of neuroses mixed with anger, abrasiveness, and - in most cases, with a few exceptions - difficulty in expressing sincere affection; and a chronic inability to understand either his own emotions or those of people around him (including Wei Wuxian’s), or to sincerely communicate his emotions to others. (All of that does make him an interesting character, and fantastic fanfic fodder - many envies is one of my favourite Untamed fics, and has easily the best portrayal of Jiang Cheng that I’ve read.) (Basically, the sheer volume of both Jiang Cheng bashing and Jiang Cheng apologia out there has mainly had the effect of moving my sentiments on him from “disaster (annoyed/judgemental)” to “disaster (grudgingly affectionate)”, but it intermittently swings back to “asshole. the absolute worst.” when I remember he abandoned Wen Qing to be burned to death when she lost everything as a consequence of saving his life - and what he values more than his life.)

Wen Qing is also one of my favourite characters, because she continually takes great risks to help others at no benefit to herself simply because she knows it’s right (and is skilled and savvy enough to actually win Wen Ruohan’s respect by doing so, up to a point) - and because she knows she’s on the wrong side. In a sense, she starts out having already made the same decision that Jiang Cheng later makes - I will sacrifice all other moral principles to protect those dearest to me - but whereas he’s self-righteous about that decision (one of his more annoying traits), she knows that’s what she’s done and does everything in her power to mitigate it. And in the end she does risk everything to help the Jiangs, and loses everything, and when, after she’s done that, Jiang Cheng says I’m willing to save you but not your family or people, she doesn’t rage or resent, she just recognizes that choice and leaves; even later, when her brother has been killed because of that decision, and when Jiang Cheng tells Wei Wuxuan practically in front of her that he should abandon her and her brother and her people to death, she doesn’t get angry at him. She’s capable of understanding where people are coming from, of not treating their moral valence as something determined purely by their treatment of herself, in a way that Jiang Cheng, again, isn’t. And at the end, when she sees that Wei Wuxian is going to pay the price for the choice that she made long ago to serve Wen Ruohan, she decides that she will turn herself in and face the consequences of that choice rather than let him bear it for her. She’s a strong contender for my favourite character in the show (extreme competence is also a factor in that; that’s always appealing).

[jackoshadows]

One of the things that totally baffles and frustrates me in the asoiaf fandom is the fanon that Sansa is smarter and more diplomatic than Jon and Dany.

How can anyone read the books and come to the conclusion that Sansa is more diplomatic than Jon and Dany? On what basis is this comparison made? Jon and Dany are military leaders and rulers respectively who have successfully negotiated from disadvantaged positions. What is the equivalent of this for Sansa?

These are the issues that Dany faced in Meereen -  olive trees burned down, winter on the horizon making agriculture disadvantageous, former merchants and slaves with no money and a blockade on Meereen by surrounding regions. Jon has 19 decrepit castles on the wall that he has to refit and rebuild and get ready and he has no money, food or men to do this. What is Sansa’s more smarter and diplomatic tactics to deal with these issues?

What is his tax policy? How does he feel about crop rotation? How does he handle land disputes between two nobles, both of whom think that they should have the village, so they burn it down to establish their claim. This is the hard part of ruling be it in the middle ages or now. It’s not enough to be a good man to be an effective ruler. It’s complicated and it’s hard and I wanted to show that with repeated examples in my books with my kings and hand of the kings - the prime minister if you would - trying to rule. And whether it be Ned Stark or Tyrion Lannister or Tywin Lannister or Daenerys Targaryen or Cersei Lannister trying to deal with the real challenges that affect anyone trying to rule the 7K or even a city like Meereen and it’s hard. You know, we can all read the books or read history and say oh, so and so was stupid and made a lot of mistakes and look at all these stupid mistakes they make. But these kind of mistakes are always much more apparent in hind sight than when you are actually faced with the decision about, oh my God, what would I do in this situation. How do I resolve this thing? Do I do the moral thing? But what about  the political consequences of the moral thing? Do I do the pragmatic, cynical thing and kind of screw the people who are screwed by it? I mean, it is HARD. And I want to get to all of that - GRRM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJCb3xyWyAg

Where has Sansa dealt with the above issues to make a determination on how she would do better than Dany? Or even do better than Cersei for that matter?

Here is GRRM talking about how frustrating it is that he was not able to compare Daenerys and Cersei as rulers in ADWD:

His biggest lament in splitting A Feast for Crows from A Dance with Dragons is the parallels he was drawing between Cersei and Daenerys.  

Cersei and Daenerys are intended as parallel characters --each exploring  a different approach to how a woman would rule in a male dominated,  medieval-inspired fantasy world.

GRRM, SSM,  July 08, 2007  

George regrets that Cersei and Dany will not be contrasted directly.   He likes the extra breathing room to flesh out the characters. Bran  didn't have any chapters and Dany's ending was different. Now he likes  the way she ended. I think he actually may be doing more with Dany.  

Comic-Con (San Diego, CA; July 20-23)

Where has he talked about contrasting Dany and Sansa? Or Sansa and Cersei? Where are the parallel leadership arcs for Dany and Sansa or Jon and Sansa like there is for Jon and Dany in ADwD?

Jon Snow has negotiated a loan with the Iron Bank, Dany agrees for peace with Yunkai by marriage with Hizdahr and Sansa managed to persuade an eight year old to eat his dinner. How are they even compared at the same level?!

It took an entire book and Ned Stark losing his head for Sansa to realize that the Lannisters were not the good guys. Despite the Lannisters doing increasingly evil things like ordering Sansa’s pet wolf killed. Her younger siblings like Arya cottoned onto that in their first chapters. Sansa then thought that beautiful, charming Margaery was simply the best and the Tyrells ended up using her. She thought Dontos was a good guy. In the Vale, she is pushing the Maester to do what LF wants with respect to SweetRobin. How is she smarter than Jon, Dany or the rest of her siblings? It’s this weird changing of canon in the completely opposite direction. Take the least smart character among the youngsters in the books and make them the smartest in fanon.

I know the show is responsible a lot for pushing this piece of fanon, when Benioff, Weiss and Cogman stripped book Jon and Dany of their leadership arcs and tried to hand them off to Sansa to prop up their favorite character.

But what’s baffling is the so called asoiaf book experts writing about stupid Jon and smart Sansa. About psychopathic assassin murder baby Arya and clever, measured leader Sansa, about ignorant, impulsive Dany and calm, compassionate, hope for the future Sansa. The thing is, no one knows on what basis and metrics they come to this conclusion. It just is. There are no detailed essays comparing Jon and Sansa’s leadership arcs, or Dany and Sansa’s arc of being rulers. But Sansa is still somehow more intelligent and diplomatic.

It’s also connected to this rather sexist strand of thought that only women who wield soft power are smart and level-headed. Tyrion is the only male character allowed to be smart and women who wield hard power like Dany or gnc characters like Arya and Brienne are impulsive, arrogant and ignorant.

In some ways I can see why this has happened. A lot of fandom want Sansa to be special in some way and have an important role to play. And since her narrative story arc is with Littlefinger, she is assigned to be the SMART one. But to be special, she has to be the only smart character.

Plus, Sansa has progressed the least in her arc compared to her peers. She’s a blank slate on whom her fans can project their desires and wishes for her character. The show did something similar - only D&D were too lazy to come up with something original and gave her Jeyne Poole’s story.

But still, there has to be a basis for such statements about the book characters.  It’s not just enough to keep repeating that Sansa is the smartest ever - like ultimate hacks D&D did on the badly written garbage show did. They were rightly laughed at for their ‘Sansa is the cleverest person’ dialogue. But for some reason such statements are accepted for the book version.

The books are well written with gradual character development. Surely, if Sansa is smarter than Jon and Dany we should read that in the books? That this fanon has literally become canon despite not having any basis at all in the books is one of the most frustrating aspects of asoiaf fandom.

[evanescentjasmine]

I’m going to talk about a little pet peeve of mine with regard to portrayal of poc in fic, TMA specifically since that’s what I mostly read and write for. 

I suppose I should first start by saying that, of course, poc are not a monolith, and I’m certain there are other poc who have many different views on this issue. And also this post is in no way meant to demonise, shame, or otherwise discourage people from writing poc in fic if they’re doing something differently. This is just a thing I’ve been noodling on for a while and have had several interesting conversations with friends about, and now that I think I’ve figured out why I have this pet peeve, I figured I’d gather my thoughts into a post.

As a result of the fact we have no canonical racial, ethnic, or religious backgrounds for our main TMA cast, we’ve ended up with many diverse headcanons, and it’s absolutely lovely to see. I’m all for more diversity and I’m always delighted to see people’s headcanons. 

However, what often happens is I’ll be reading a fic and plodding along in a character’s PoV and get mention of their skin colour. And nothing else. I find this, personally, extremely jarring. In a short one-shot it makes sense, because you’re usually touching on one scenario and then dipping out. Likewise if the fic is in a different setting, is cracky, or is told from someone else’s PoV, that’s all fine. But if I’m reading a serious long-fic close in the poc’s head and...nothing? That’s just bizarre to me.

Your heritage, culture, religion, and background, all of those affect how you view the world, and how the world views you in return. How people treat you, how you carry yourself, what you’re conscious of, all of that shifts. And the weird thing is that many writers are aware of this when it comes to characters being ace or trans or neurodivergent—and I’m genuinely pleased by that, don’t get me wrong. Nothing has made my ace self happier than the casual aceness in TMA fics that often resonates so well with my experience. But just as gender, orientation, and neurodivergence change how a character interacts with their world, so do race, ethnicity, and religion. 

As a child, I spent a couple of years in England while my mother was getting her degree. Though I started using Arabic less and less, my mother still spoke to me almost exclusively in Arabic at home. We still ate romy cheese and molokhia and the right kind of rice, though we missed out on other things. She managed to get an Egyptian channel on TV somehow, which means I still grew up with different cultural touchstones and make pop-culture references that I can’t share with my non-Arabic-speaking friends. She also became friends with just about every Egyptian in her university, so for those years I had a bevy of unrelated Uncles and Aunties from cities all over Egypt, banding together to go on outings or celebrate our holidays.

As an adult who sometimes travels abroad solo, and as a fair-skinned Arab who’s fluent in English, usually in a Western country the most I’ll get is puzzled people trying to parse my accent and convinced someone in my family came from somewhere. When they hear my name, though, that shifts. I get things like surprise, passive-aggressive digs at my home region, weird questions, insistence I don’t look Egyptian (which, what does that even mean?) or the ever-popular, ever-irritating: Oh, your English is so good!

At airports, with my Egyptian passport, it’s less benign. I am very commonly taken aside for extra security, all of which I expect and am prepared for, and which always confuses foreign friends who insisted beforehand that surely they wouldn’t pull me aside. Unspoken is the fact I, y’know, don’t look like what they imagine a terrorist would. But I’m Arab and that’s how it goes, despite my, er, more “Western” leaning presentation. 

This would be an entirely different story if I were hijabi, or had darker skin, or a more pronounced accent. I am aware I’m absolutely awash with privilege. Likewise, it would be different if I had a non-Arab name and passport. 

So it’s slightly baffling to me as to why a Jon who is Pakistani or Indian or Arab and/or Black British would go through life the exact same way a white British character would. 

Now, I understand that race and ethnicity can be very fraught, and that many writers don’t want to step on toes or get things wrong or feel it isn’t their place to explore these things, and certainly I don’t think it’s a person’s place to explore The Struggles of X Background unless they also share said background. I’m not saying a fic should portray racism and microaggressions either (and if they do, please take care and tag them appropriately), but that past experiences of them would affect a character. A fic doesn’t have to be about the Arab Experience With Racism (™) to mention that, say, an Arab Jon headed to the airport in S3 for his world tour would have been very conscious to be as put together as he could, given the circumstances, and have all his things in order. 

And there’s so much more to us besides. What stories did your character grow up with? What language was spoken at home? Do they also speak it? If not, how do they feel about that? What are their comfort foods? Their family traditions? The things they do without thinking? The obscure pop-culture opinions they can’t even begin to explain? (Ask me about the crossover between Egyptian political comedy and cosmic horror sometime…)

I’m not saying you’ll always get it right. Hell, I’m not saying I always get it right either. I’m sure someone can read one of my fics and be like, “nope, this isn’t true to me!” And that’s okay. The important thing, for me, is trying.

Because here’s the thing. 

I want you to imagine reading a fic where I, a born and raised Egyptian, wrote white characters in, say, a suburb in the US as though they shared my personal experiences. It’s a multi-generational household, people of the same gender greet with a kiss on each cheek, lunch is the main meal, adults only move out when they get married, every older person they meet is Auntie or Uncle, every bathroom has a bidet, there’s a backdrop of Muslim assumptions and views of morality, and the characters discuss their Eid plans because, well, everyone celebrates Eid, obviously.

Weird, right? 

So why is this normal the other way around? 

Have you ever stopped to wonder why white (and often, especially American) experiences are considered the default? The universal inoffensive base on which the rest is built? 

Yes, I understand that writers are trying to be inoffensive and respectful of other backgrounds. But actually, I find the usual method of having the only difference be their skin colour or features pretty reductive. We’re more than just a paint job or a sprinkle of flavour to add on top of the default. Many of us have fundamentally different life experiences and ignoring this contributes to that assumption of your experience being universal. 

Yes, fic is supposed to be for fun and maybe you don’t want to have to think about all this, and I get that completely. I have all the respect in the world for writers who tag their TMA fics as an American AU, or who don’t mention anyone’s races. I get it. But when you have characters without a canonical race and you give them one, you’re making a decision, and I want you to think about it. 

Yes, this is a lot of research, but the internet is full of people talking about themselves and their experiences. Read their articles, read their blogs, read their twitter threads, watch their videos, see what they have to say and use it as a jumping-off point. I’m really fond of the Writing With Color blog, so if you’re not sure where to start I’d recommend giving them a look. 

Because writers outside of the Anglosphere already do this research in order to write in most fandoms. Writers of colour already put themselves in your shoes to write white characters. And frankly, given the amount of care that many white writers put into researching Britishisms, I don’t see why this can’t extend to other cultural differences as well.

[blackswaneuroparedux]

Anonymous said: I didn’t know too much about the late British philosopher Sir Roger Scruton until I followed your superbly cultured blog. As an ivy league educated American reading your posts, I feel he is a breath of fresh air as a sane and cultured conservative intellectual. We don’t really have his kind over here where things are heavily polarized between left and right, and sadly, we are often uncivil in our discourse. Sir Roger Scruton talks a lot about beauty especially in art (as indeed you do too), so for Scruton why does beauty as an aesthetic matter in art? Why should we care?

I thank you for your very kind words about my blog which I fear is not worthy of such fulsome praise.

However one who is worthy of praise (or at least gratitude and appreciation at least) is the late Sir Roger Scruton. I have had the pleasure to have met him on a few informal occasions.

Most memorably, I once got invited to High Table dinner at Peterhouse, Cambridge, by a friend who was a junior Don there. This was just after I had finished my studies at Cambridge and rather than pursue my PhD I opted instead to join the British army as a combat pilot officer. And so I found out that Scruton was dining too. We had very pleasant drinks in the SCR before and after dinner. He was exceptionally generous and kind in his consideration of others; we all basked in the gentle warmth of his wit and wisdom.

I remember talking to him about Xanthippe, Socrate’s wife, because I had read his wickedly funny fictional satire. In the book he credits the much maligned Xanthippe with being the brains behind all of Socrates’ famous philosophical ideas (as espoused by Plato).

On other occasions I had seen Roger Scruton give the odd lecture in London or at some cultural forum.

Other than that, I’ve always admire both the man and many of his ideas from afar. I do take issue with some of his intellectual ideas which seem to be taken a tad too far (he think pre-Raphaelites were kitsch) but it’s impossible to dislike the man in person.

Indeed the Marxist philosopher G.A. Cohen reportedly once refused to teach a seminar with Scruton, although they later became very good friends. This is the gap between the personal and the public persona. In public he was reviled as hate figure by some of the more intolerant of the leftists who were trying to shut him down from speaking. But in private his academic peers, writers, and philosophers, regardless of their political beliefs, hugely respected him and took his ideas seriously - because only in private will they ever admit that much of what Scruton talks about has come to pass.

In many ways he was like C.S. Lewis - a pariah to the Oxbridge establishment. At Oxford many dons poo-pooed his children stories, and especially his Christian ideas of faith, culture, and morality, and felt he should have laid off the lay theology and stuck to his academic speciality of English Literature. But an Oxford friend, now a don, tells me that many dons read his theological works in private because much of what he wrote has become hugely relevant today.

Scruton was a man of parts, some of which seemed irreconcilable: barrister, aesthetician, distinguished professor of aesthetics. Outside of brief pit stops at Cambridge, Oxford, and St Andrews, he was mostly based out of Birkbeck College, London University, which had a tradition of a working-class intake and to whom Scruton was something of a popular figure. He was also an editor of the ultra-Conservative Salisbury Review, organist, and an enthusiastic fox hunter. In addition he wrote over 50 books on philosophy, art, music, politics, literature, culture, sexuality, and religion, as well as finding time to write novels and two operas. He was widely recognised for his services to philosophy, teaching and public education, receiving a knighthood in 2016.

He was exactly the type of polymath England didn’t know what to do with because we British do discourage such continental affectations and we prefer people to know their lane and stick to it. Above all we’re suspicious of polymaths because no one likes a show off. Scruton could be accused of a few things but he never perceived as a show off. He was a gentle, reserved, and shy man of kindly manners.

He was never politically ‘Conservative’, or tried not to be. Indeed he encouraged many to think about defining “a philosophy of conservatism” and not “a philosophy for the Conservative Party.” In defining his own thoughts, he positioned conservatism to relation to its historical rivals, liberalism and socialism. He wrote that liberalism was the product of the enlightenment, which viewed society as a contract and the state as a system for guaranteeing individual rights. While he saw socialism as the product of the industrial revolution, and an ideology which views society as an economic system and the state as a means of distributing social wealth.

Like another great English thinkers, Michael Oakeshott, he felt that conservatives leaned more towards liberalism then socialism, but argued that for conservatives, freedom should also entail responsibility, which in turn depends on public spirit and virtue. Many classical liberals would agree.

In fact, he criticised Thatcherism for “its inadequate emphasis on the civic virtues, such as self-sacrifice, duty, solidarity and service of others.” Scruton agreed with classical liberals in believing that markets are not necessarily expressions of selfishness and greed, but heavily scolded his fellow Conservatives for allowing themselves to be caricatured as leaving social problems to the market. Classical liberals could be criticised for the same neglect.

Perhaps his conservative philosophy was best summed up when he wrote “Liberals seek freedom, socialists equality, and conservatives responsibility. And, without responsibility, neither freedom nor equality have any lasting value.”

Scruton’s politics were undoubtedly linked to his philosophy, which was broadly Hegelian. He took the view that all of the most important aspects of life – truth (the perception of the world as it is), beauty (the creation and appreciation of things valued for their own sake), and self-realisation (the establishment by a person of a coherent, autonomous identity) – can be achieved only as part of a cultural community within which meaning, standards and values are validated. But he had a wide and deep understanding of the history of western philosophy as a whole, and some of his best philosophical work consisted of explaining much more clearly than is often the case how different schools of western philosophy relate to one another.

People today still forget how he was a beacon for many East European intellectuals living under Communist rule in the 1980s.  Scruton was deeply attached in belonging to a network of renowned Western scholars who were helping the political opposition in Eastern Europe. Their activity began in Czechoslovakia with the Jan Hus Foundation in 1980, supported by a broad spectrum of scholars from Jacques Derrida and Juergen Habermas to Roger Scruton and David Regan. Then came Poland, Hungary and later Romania. In Poland, Scruton co-founded the Jagiellonian Trust, a small but significant organisation. The other founders and active participants were Baroness Caroline Cox, Jessica Douglas-Home, Kathy Wilkes, Agnieszka Kołakowska, Dennis O’Keeffe, Timothy Garton Ash, and others.

Scruton had a particular sympathy for Prague and the Czech society, which bore fruit in the novel, Notes from Underground, which he wrote many years later. But his involvement in East European affairs was more than an emotional attachment.  He believed that Eastern Europe - despite the communist terror and aggressive social engineering - managed to preserve a sense of historical continuity and strong ties to European and national traditions, more unconscious than openly articulated, which made it even more valuable. For this reason, decades later, he warned his East European friends against joining the European Union, arguing that whatever was left of those ties will be demolished by the political and ideological bulldozer of European bureaucracy.

Anyway, digressions aside, onto to the heart of your question.

Art matters.

Let’s start from there. Regardless of your personal tastes or aesthetics as you stand before a painting, slip inside a photograph, run your hand along the length of a sculpture, or move your body to the arrangements spiraling out of the concert speakers…something very primary - and primal - is happening. And much of it sub-conscious. There’s an element of trust.

Political philosopher, Hannah Arendt, defined artworks as “thought things,” ideas given material form to inspire reflection and rumination. Dialogue. Sometimes even discomfort. Art has the ability to move us, both positively and negatively. So we know that art matters. But the question posed by modern philosophers such as Roger Scruton has been: how do we want it to affect us?

Are we happy with the direction art is taking? Namely, says, Scruton, away from seeking “higher virtues” such as beauty and craftmanship, and instead, towards novelty for novelty’s sake, provoking emotional response under the guise of socio-political discourse.

Why does beauty in art matter?  

Scruton asks us to wake up and start demanding something more from art other than disposable entertainment. “Through the pursuit of beauty,” suggests Scruton, “we shape the world as our own and come to understand our nature as spiritual beings. But art has turned its back on beauty and now we are surrounded by ugliness.” The great artists of the past, says Scruton, “were painfully aware that human life was full of care and suffering, but their remedy was beauty. The beautiful work of art brings consolation in sorrow and affirmation…It shows human life to be worthwhile.” But many modern artists, argues the philosopher, have become weary of this “sacred task” and replaced it with the “randomness” of art produced merely to gain notoriety and the result has been anywhere between kitsch to ugliness that ultimately leads to inward alienation and nihilistic despair.

The best way to understand Scruton’s idea of beauty in art and why it matters is to let him speak for himself. Click below on the video and watch a BBC documentary broadcast way back in 2009 that he did precisely on this subject, why beauty matters. It will not be a wasted hour but perhaps enrich and even enlighten your perspective on the importance of beauty in art.

So I’ll do my best to summarise the point Scruton is making in this documentary above.

Here goes.....

In his 2009 documentary “Why Beauty Matters”, Scruton argues that beauty is a universal human need that elevates us and gives meaning to life. He sees beauty as a value, as important as truth or goodness, that can offer “consolation in sorrow and affirmation in joy”, therefore showing human life to be worthwhile.

According to Scruton, beauty is being lost in our modern world, particularly in the fields of art and architecture.

I was raised in many different cultures from India, Pakistan, to China, Japan, Southern Africa, and the Middle East as well schooling in rural Britain and Switzerland. So coming home to London on frequent visits was often a confusing experience because of the mismatch of modern art and new architecture. In life and in art I have chosen to see the beauty in things, locating myself in Paris, where I am surrounded by beauty, and understand the impact it can have on the everyday.

Scruton’s disdain for modern art begins with Marcel Duchamp’s urinal. Originally a satirical piece designed to mock the world of art and the snobberies that go with it, it has come to mean that anything can be art and anyone can be an artist. A “cult of ugliness” was created where originality is placed above beauty and the idea became more important than the artwork itself. He argues that art became a joke, endorsed by critics, doing away with a need for skill, taste or creativity.

Duchamp’s argument was that the value of any object lies solely in what each individual assigns it, and thus, anything can be declared “art,” and anyone an artist.

But is there something wrong with the idea that everything is art and everyone an artist? If we celebrate the democratic ideals of all citizens being equal and therefore their input having equal value, doesn’t Duchamp’s assertion make sense?

Who’s to say, after all, what constitutes beauty?

This resonated with me in particular and brought to mind when Scruton meets the artist Michael Craig-Martin and asks him about how Duchamp’s urinal first made him feel. Martin is best known for his work “An Oak Tree” which is a glass of water on a shelf, with text beside it explaining why it is an oak tree. Martin argues that Duchamp captures the imagination and that art is an art because we think of it as such.

When I first saw “An Oak Tree” I was confused and felt perhaps I didn’t have the intellect to understand it. When I would later question it with friends who worked in the art auction and gallery world, the response was always “You just don’t get it,” which became a common defence. To me, it was reminiscent of Hans Christian Andersen’s short tale “The Emperor’s New Clothes”, about two weavers who promise an emperor a new suit of clothes that they say is invisible to those who are unfit for their positions, stupid or incompetent. In reality, they make no clothes at all.

Scruton argues that the consumerist culture has been the catalyst for this change in modern art. We are always being sold something, through advertisements that feed our appetite for stuff, adverts try to be brash and outrageous to catch our attention. Art mimics advertising as artists attempt to create brands, the product that they sell is themselves. The more shocking and outrageous the artwork, the more attention it receives. Scruton is particularly disturbed by Piero Manzoni’s artwork “Artist’s Shit” which consists of 90 tin cans filled with the artist’s excrement.

Moreover the true aesthetic value, the beauty, has vanished in modern works that are selling for millions of dollars. In such works, by artists like Rothko, Franz Kline, Damien Hirst, and Tracey Emin, the beauty has been replaced by discourse. The lofty ideals of beauty are replaced by a social essay, however well intentioned.

A common argument for modern art is that it is reflecting modern life in all of its disorder and ugliness. Scruton suggests that great art has always shown the real in the light of the ideal and that in doing so it is transfigured.

A great painting does not necessarily have a beautiful subject matter, but it is made beautiful through the artist’s interpretation of it. Rembrandt shows this with his portraits of crinkly old women and men or the compassion and kindness of which Velazquez paints the dwarfs in the Spanish court. Modern art often takes the literal subject matter and misses the creative act. Scruton expresses this point using the comparison of Tracey Emin’s artwork ‘My Bed’ and a painting by Delacroix of the artist’s bed.

The subject matters are the same. The unmade beds in all of their sordid disdain. Delacroix brings beauty to a thing that lacks it through the considered artistry of his interpretation and by doing so, places a blessing on his own emotional chaos. Emin shares the ugliness that the bed shows by using the literal bed. According to Emin, it is art because she says that it is so.

Philosophers argued that through the pursuit of beauty, we shape the world as our home. Traditional architecture places beauty before utility, with ornate decorative details and proportions that satisfy our need for harmony. It reminds us that we have more than just practical needs but moral and spiritual needs too. Oscar Wilde said “All art is absolutely useless,” intended as praise by placing art above utility and on a level with love, friendship, and worship. These are not necessarily useful but are needed.

We have all experienced the feeling when we see something beautiful. To be transported by beauty, from the ordinary world to, as Scruton calls it, “the illuminated sphere of contemplation.” It is as if we feel the presence of a higher world. Since the beginning of western civilisation, poets and philosophers have seen the experience of beauty as a calling to the divine.

According to Scruton, Plato described beauty as a cosmic force flowing through us in the form of sexual desire. He separated the divine from sexuality through the distinction between love and lust. To lust is to take for oneself, whereas to love is to give. Platonic love removes lust and invites us to engage with it spiritually and not physically. As Plato says, “Beauty is a visitor from another world. We can do nothing with it save contemplate its pure radiance.”

Scruton makes the prescient point that art and beauty were traditionally aligned in religious works of art. Science impacted religion and created a spiritual vacuum. People began to look to nature for beauty, and there was a shift from religious works of art to paintings of landscapes and human life.

In today’s world of art and architecture, beauty is looked upon as a thing of the past with disdain. Scruton believes his vision of beauty gives meaning to the world and saves us from meaningless routines to take us to a place of higher contemplation. In this I think Scruton encourages us not to take revenge on reality by expressing its ugliness, but to return to where the real and the ideal may still exist in harmony “consoling our sorrows and amplifying our joys.”

Scruton believes when you train any of your senses you are privy to a heightened world. The artist sees beauty everywhere and they are able to draw that beauty out to show to others. One finds the most beauty in nature, and nature the best catalyst for creativity. The Tonalist painter George Inness advised artists to paint their emotional response to their subject, so that the viewer may hope to feel it too.

It must be said that Scruton’s views regarding art and beauty are not popular with the modern art crowd and their postmodern advocates. Having written several books on aesthetics, Scruton has developed a largely metaphysical aspect to understanding standards of art and beauty.

Throughout this documentary (and indeed his many books and articles), Scruton display a bias towards ‘high’ art, evidenced by a majority of his examples as well as his dismissal of much modern art. However on everyday beauty, there is much space for Scruton to challenge his own categories and extend his discussion to include examples from popular culture, such as in music, graphic design, and film. Omitting ‘low art’ in the discussion of beauty could lead one to conclude that beauty is not there.

It is here I would part ways with Scruton. I think there is beauty to be found in so called low art of car design, popular music or cinema for example - here I’m thinking of a Ferrari 250 GTO,  jazz, or the films of Bergman, Bresson, or Kurosawa (among others) come to mind. Scruton gives short thrift to such 20th century art forms which should not be discounted when we talk of beauty. It’s hard to argue with Jean-Luc Godard for instance when he once said of French film pioneering director, Robert Bresson, “He is the French cinema, as Dostoevsky is the Russian novel and Mozart is German music.”

Overall though I believe Scruton does enough to leave us to ponder ourselves on the importance of beauty in the arts and our lives, including fine arts, music, and architecture. I think he succeeds in illuminating the poverty, dehumanisation and fraud of modernist and post-modernist cynicism, reductionism and nihilism. Scruton is rightly prescient in pointing the centrality of human aspiration and the longing for truth in both life and art.

In this he is correct in showing that goodness and beauty are universal and fundamentally important; and that the value of anything is not utilitarian and without meaning (e.g., Oscar Wilde’s claim that “All art is absolutely useless.”). Human beings are not purposeless material objects for mechanistic manipulation by others, and civil society itself depends upon a cultural consensus that beauty is real and every person should be respected with compassion as having dignity and nobility with very real spiritual needs to encounter and be transformed and uplifted by beauty.

Thanks for your question.

[robininthelabyrinth]

Lan Qiren is in Qinghe for whatever reason, and hears JGY playing for NMJ. He recognizes the melody, but now what? They just came out of a war, the Lans are still weakened. He cannot go against the Jins alone, he learned that his nephews are as stubborn as their fatheir in their love and doesn't want LXC stuck in the middle, the Jiangs are still weak and recovering. There's only one person who can help him save his nephew's brother/boyfriend/soulmate/fiance/something? LQR visits Yiling.

Lan Qiren had once wanted to be a travelling musician, before his elder brother ruined both their lives.

He’d always been sensitive to music, even more so than most of his clan. When he was very young, he’d told his mother about the music he could hear all the time, in his head, the good music and the bad, the harmonious and the discordant, and she’d gently stroked his forehead and told him that one day he would learn to play something so beautiful that he could drown it all out.

He never had.

She was gone now, his mother, heart-broken and aged faster than she should have – another casualty of his brother’s selfishness, that he called love. Lan Qiren never denied that his brother’s song was a love song, the pure notes of the xiao calling out to a dream lover, beckoning but never summoned in return; it was only that long before his brother had met his wife he had already heard the way the high treble of his song was unstable, straining, powerful but without foundation. The direction of the music was the wrong way around, however beautiful: too many high notes, untethered to reality – untethered to anything, really.

Not to family, not to duty, nothing.

He didn’t care about anything, his brother. Only himself.

Lan Qiren still played, of course. He’d never been especially good at fighting – that had been the specialty of the mighty Qingheng-jun, noble and above it all – and it turned out he was a fairly good teacher, of music and cultivation and morality. That worked out for everyone: it meant he could stay home, where it was safe, and govern the affairs of the Lan sect to ensure that there was something there for his nephews to inherit.

He was never allowed to go travelling.

Still, it wasn’t all bad. Even if his brother renounced the world, he had given Lan Qiren his nephews. Beautiful children, both of them: the simple song of cleansing for Lan Xichen, the child who smiled as lightly as the breeze; the complex chords of Inquiry for Lan Wangji, the serious child who thought too much.

Lan Qiren tried to do his best by them both, however clumsily: he tried to teach them duty, to teach them the importance of family, he tried to teach them compassion – he tried to try to stamp out his brother’s instability and inability to recognize the damage his actions could do, and did, to others. His brother had been a genius, and his children inherited his talent, but Lan Qiren would not let them become arrogant, as he had become, to think that because of their talent the road before them would always be smooth – such that the first stumble would be enough to cast them down into the abyss.

The war, and their father’s death, taught them that better than he could ever have.

Lan Qiren was not a very good fighter, and an even worse general, but he did whatever he could. He had prepared Lan Xichen as much as possible for the position of sect leader, though he’d thought there would still be years and years before his nephew would have to take it up; in the end, Lan Xichen inherited it too early but still excelled, keeping his head and remembering to think things through.

Lan Wangji was earnest and hardworking, as Lan Qiren had once been; he protected what he could, did what he could, and never sought fame instead of helping the helpless.

Lan Qiren was very proud of both of them.

He only hoped he had done enough for them.

It was usually Lan Wangji he worried about, both in the past and today: he had the family stubbornness, their tendency towards blind faith, and he too often associated with bad company, which made Lan Qiren afraid.

His brother had loved a murderess, and sought to help her escape her punishment no matter what justice required – how dare you pardon her, he’d screamed at his brother all those years ago, don’t you remember that the man she murdered was my teacher too, that I loved him, that his wife grieves for him, that his children are orphaned, who cares if you love her, she still needs to pay for what she’s done, and his brother had shrugged it all off and said I have decided and because he was sect leader there was nothing Lan Qiren could do about it – and Lan Wangji is altogether too fond of Wei Wuxian.

Wei Wuxian, the Yiling Patriarch, who reminded Lan Qiren very much of her.

Lan Qiren had taught himself over the years not to hate her, his brother’s beloved with blood on her hands, for the death of his dreams and the cage of duty that had come down around him; those could only be ascribed to his brother. He still felt justified in hating her for the death of his teacher, who had been kind and strict and perhaps a little silly, overly moral, a stickler – he had only tried to stop wrongdoing, as he always had, and she had killed him in the defense someone she had believed was in the right without a shred of evidence, based on nothing but her belief that they wouldn’t lie to her.

Foolish.

That was the true tragedy of it. For all the damage she ultimately wrought upon his life, she was in the end little more than a stupid little girl who was, in her own way, deceived by love.

Friendship, too, was love.

Lan Qiren had brought her the signed confession of her dear friend, the woman she’d called her sister, the proof that that ‘sister’ of hers had in fact committed the crimes that the teacher had accused her of and that her counter-accusation against him had been fabricated purely as a distraction – you killed an innocent man, he had told her, voice cold, because you couldn’t be bothered to think for yourself – and that had been the thing that had made her finally realize that she would spend the rest of her life in a prison for what she had done. That there was no rescue, no reprieve; that this was the consequence of what she had done, the penalty she would have to pay, and she might as well make the best of it.

He’d finally had a nephew, the year after that.

It had been the only thing he could think to do for his brother, who despite everything he loved to the bone. They were all fools for love, in his family.

At least Lan Xichen had found himself a good love.

His childhood friend, who was as honest and upright as he was: Nie Mingjue was solemn and sincere, in need of someone to cheer him up, and Lan Xichen had no greater pleasure in life than trying to coax out his rare smiles.

Lan Qiren enjoyed ‘accidentally’ bumping into the Nie boy whenever he snuck out of the hanshi at odd hours, if only because it consistently made the other man look as though he was regretting being born. They were so shy about it, even though Lan Qiren had made it clear that he wouldn’t stand in their way as long as they did their duties to their respective families in regards to children.

Perhaps it wasn’t him that they were worried about. The rest of the world might not be so understanding; he couldn’t blame them for treasuring their love between them as if it were a tender flame that might blow out if exposed to the fierce wind.

He still enjoyed teasing them both.

This evening, though, it had been different.

Nie Mingjue’s face had been flushed red, as it always was, and he made his excuses as if they pained him – he’d never enjoyed hiding, would tell the world if Lan Xichen would let him – and that was all quite normal, but there was something wrong with his song. It was usually a steady beat, militant and powerful and inspiring, but it was oddly out of tune, another melody forcing its way in.

It wasn’t the gentle strains of two songs merging, each one yielding to the other, two songs joining together in harmony to become one – this was a clash, one melody suppressing the other and knocking it out of joint. Dangerous, disharmonic –

It sounded like poison.

It sounded like – Lan Xichen?

Lan Qiren bid Nie Mingjue a hasty farewell, forgoing his usual gentle mockery, and retreated to his own home, breathing hard. It was impossible, what he had heard, utterly impossible.

Lan Xichen would never – he loved Nie Mingjue.

Though – he loved Jin Guangyao, too, who presented himself as polite and gentle but whose inner tune was always a step off beat, sometimes too slow, at other times too frenzied. With such uneven music in his heart, it was always a surprise to Lan Qiren that Jin Guangyao could play instruments as well as he could, manipulating them with his clever fingers until they did what he wanted them to.

Lan Xichen loved Jin Guangyao, and Nie Mingjue did not, and…

There were always ways to resolve that sort of thing.

No. Lan Qiren knew his nephew, or thought he did. Lan Xichen was sincere in his affections, honest and righteous, and more than that he was caring – he would never, never, never murder one lover to more easily replace him with another.

And yet.

Lan Qiren recognized the song that was stealing into Nie Mingjue’s body, leeching away his self-control and pushing him slowly towards an agonizing death. It was Clarity, a song he had taught Lan Xichen with his own two hands, and the invading song was Turmoil, a collection in the Forbidden Library that no one but the sect elders could access – though such a restriction did not apply to the sect leader.

He hadn’t thought Lan Xichen had looked at those songs, but he had been the one who had taken their collection of books with him when he fled the Cloud Recesses. There would have been plenty of time to look over them, to learn them, to –

No.

Lan Qiren couldn’t believe it. He wouldn’t believe it. Even if the portions of the song that were Clarity sounded like a perfect replica of the way Lan Xichen played the melody, each pause and each start characteristic of his nephew – he would not believe it, not for nothing.

Not until there was proof.

He’d spent so long trying to save his nephews from his brother’s mistake – he would not now allow them to fall into their mother’s: of being too quick to judge, too trusting, too blind.

He would find out what happened first, and only then decide.

But how could he investigate? Lan Qiren knew himself: he did not have the power to take the journeys that would undoubtedly be necessary to find out what had happened, still healing as he was from the wounds of war; the strain on his heart would likely kill him. Lan Wangji had the musical talent to do it, and do it well, but it would break his heart even to ask him to consider his brother a suspect. But there was no one else so skilled in music, who lived with it day in and day out, who used it even above a sword –

There was one.

He wants to bring someone back to Gusu, uncle, to hide them, Lan Xichen had told him, his eyes troubled; they had both known without saying who that person was. I don’t know what to do. The things they are saying about him…

At that time, Lan Qiren had opposed any attempt to reach out to Wei Wuxian, that troublesome brat. He had still hoped that by putting distance between them, Lan Wangji would eventually learn to forget or at least learn to think clearly, but that was clearly not working.

He would write a letter, he decided, and send it off at once. There was no need for an introduction: Lan Qiren had been the boy’s teacher once – a teacher for a day, a father for a lifetime, no matter that they’d never one gotten along – and anyway, Wei Wuxian had been planning on leaving his mountain soon in order to attend his nephew’s first month’s party, to which he had been invited.

Lan Qiren would ask him to come to Gusu first, instead of heading to Lanling directly through the Qiongi Path. He would offer him the protection of the Lan sect in the event that someone in the Jin clan thought to make trouble, a safe harbor to go to Lanling and to return unscathed, and in return he would ask Wei Wuxian to help him figure out what had happened.

He would prove his nephew’s innocence, even if only to himself.

And perhaps he could even use the same occasion to explain to Wei Wuxian why he should let Lan Wangji go, or at minimum why he should exercise the greatest caution in the future, knowing that if he dragged himself down he would be dragging down another with him…

Yes, that was what he would do.

[locria-writes]

So between Tuk'oer, Vezian, and Valentin, who's the biggest asshole? I feel like these are top 3 amongst the trashmen but I don't know just who is the biggest asshole in the top 3 itself.

i got a wholeass essay on this topic

tl;dr --

valentin -- 7/10 asshole, but a pretty decent guy underneath it all. has his own moral code that he does mostly adhere to, is capable of recognizing his assholery, and is the only one on this list capable of genuine and unselfish love.

tuko'er -- 9/10 asshole, very little redeemable about him, except that he is capable of introspection and self-reflection. had the potential to actually be a great guy, but got too embittered by the world and can't let go of the past. capable of genuine love, but it'll never not be selfish.

vezian -- 10/10 asshole, he doesn't even have the cool tragic backstory the others have to back his shit up. he was never a good guy, not even when he was a protagonist, and not now as an antagonist-figure. i don't really know if he's capable of genuine love.

long essay

Valentin is objectively an asshole. He's a hypocrite when it comes to his treatment of MC, has no qualms about lying/cheating/murdering his way to power, and is just generally unnecessarily blunt, surly, and quarrelsome, but underneath all that, he doesn't just have the potential to be a great guy -- he's actually quite valiant, albeit with some moral liberties and questionable methods, but let's take what we can get, okay?

His whole arc revolves around his pursuit of revenge, at least that's how others see it. But to Valentin, it's a fight to amend his rightfully-perceived injustices. He isn't doing it wholly for himself, in fact, his primary motivation is to seek justice for his mother, and in a broader respect, for all the others who have the same story he does. He doesn't hurt those he perceives as weaker than himself, and he doesn't blame the faultless, most of the time. MC is is the only exception to this because through all the hurt and anger that's been pent-up, Valentin's able to justify to himself why she's an acceptable target, and bend his principles just this once.

Unlike the other two, Valentin's perfectly capable of genuine and unselfish love, and already demonstrates it before MC. If MC were anyone else, he'd absolutely treat her very well, and he wouldn't have any qualms about acknowledging any feelings toward her. MC's only flaw is that she's Burkhard's daughter, and at the very least, Valentin can acknowledge his hypocrisy and deep down, he knows it's unfair to hate and hurt her for reasons far beyond any control.

On a meta-level, is Valentin's character an asshole? Yes, but only in this specific scenario. If his father had been even just 10% less of an asshole, or if he had a strong and non-murderous paternal role model, he wouldn't be a victim of Asshole Syndrome. Would he still be a surly jerk? Absolutely, but he'd be pretty harmless to MC overall, so he's a 7/10 asshole in AAB, but a 5/10 asshole as a character concept, if that makes sense.

Tuko'er, oh this piece of shit, Tuko'er. Undoubtedly an asshole's asshole, he's petty, ruthless, vicious, and completely unhinged. He takes delight in hurting the one he loves, and even more out of just being toxic toward her, and to be totally honest, he just wants to drag her down to his level so he won't be so lonely down there hell. He's an irredeemable abuser who is perpetuating the cycle, but let's take a step back for a second to look at how we got here.

He grew up in a household where power was the only thing that mattered. His father scorned him and set out to purposefully to make him miserable because of his mother is, and his mother was emotionally-unavailable and resented him for being his father's son. His older siblings either ignored and tormented him, and the same went for the servants. Despite all this, he was still very much a noble and magnanimous wide-eyed idealist, though he was internalizing all of this shitty behaviour deep down. Tuko'er craved affection and validation, received neither from his household, and the only person he ever really connected with and felt 'seen' by was Utanzhu. Funny enough, his frustrations over how powerless and useless he was in helping her all culminated to him falling victim to Asshole Syndrome, and becoming everything he didn't want to be. Lo and behold, it worked in his favour, and validated his behaviour.

At one point, before he became an asshole, Tuko'er loved genuinely and unselfishly. He craved affection, but never thought he was entitled to it, but now, after embracing shitty behaviour so long, it's become completely twisted. He treats his consorts and Samazy indifferently -- polite, distant, and doing no more and no less than what's expected, while with Utanzhu, it's an all-consuming, irrational, and distorted love.

Like Valentin, Tuko'er is an asshole, but only under specific scenarios. If he had others he could trust, or if he had been sent away to a different court, he wouldn't have become a poster child for Asshole Syndrome. In fact, he would've probably completely embraced his noble ideals, and become more like Yumaju, to be honest. Or at the very least, closer to what Valentin is, misguided and hurt, and trying to retake control of his life by fighting against those who hurt him. In KoK, he's absolutely a 9/10 asshole with few -- if any -- redeeming qualities left, while he goes from about a 3-7/10 asshole as a character concept.

Now Vezian, my sweet and beloved Asshole Supreme. The OG Trashman, the Prototype Locria-Trashman, the guy who was just as deplorable when he was written to be a protagonist as he is now as an antagonist, an arrogant and pompous character who became a narcissistic psychopath the more I wrote him etc, etc, etc. I can't tell if he's more of a megalomaniac or a psychopath or a narcissist, but I can tell that he's a real piece of work, and desperately needs some therapy (to be honest, they all do though).

Unlike Valentin and Tuko'er, he actually had a very good childhood. Sure, there were some snide remarks about his status and his mother, but overall, his mother loved him dearly, his father was at the very least, not overtly-abusive, his siblings, the Empress, and the other consorts were all either civil, or just distant to him, and the servants charged with caring for him all treated him well. Sure, he was always an arrogant little brat, but in a way, it was justified since he was very intelligent and talented, it's just too bad he's completely embraced the Asshole Syndrome. Nobody who really matters puts him down, but Vezian's internalized those whispers he used to hear about himself as a child, and has now convinced himself that everyone sees him that way, and that Launcelin, is out to get him.

Can he love genuinely and unselfishly? At the moment, it's a tentative yes, since he does love his mother and Doradeira, but other than them, I don't know if he's capable of forming that kind of bond with anyone else, even if he does fall in love with MC. In 10+ years of writing him, I've always flip-flopped on this aspect because I'd like to believe in the best for Vezian, and that he can eventually learn to be less selfish, more open-minded, but the older I get, the less it seems likely because he doesn't think he needs help/change, and how can one grow and mature if they refuse to believe they need to in the first place?

So Vezian's absolutely an asshole in ABEA, 10/10 the others wish they could be as irredeemable as him, but on a meta level, I don't really know? I feel like he could become a regular harmless douchecanoe if he ever got the help he needed, but do I think he'd ever accept help, or even acknowledge that he needs it? He's still such a difficult character to grasp, even though I've been writing him the longest in this list.

[highladyluck]

Mat’s Types, or On Tricksters

I recently made a joke about Mat's 'type' essentially being the Shadar Logoth dagger, and while I stand by it, I also think there's a lot more to it than that. I believe Mat actually has two types, which is entirely appropriate for a trickster archetype. One of his types is playful, joyful, generous people, who reflect his early- but persistent- personality. The other is sharp, powerful, existentially dangerous people, like the person he becomes over the course of the series. Like a raven- itself a trickster figure in Haida storytelling- Mat is attracted to shiny things, mirrors, and death.

But first, some definitions. I'm calling Mat a trickster archetype, so what is that? The trickster archetype is built on a kind of dual contrast. To trick someone, you must change things in a surprising way. Tricksters introduce chaos into an ordered system, or reveal order in what was thought to be chaos. (It's not surprising, or a change, to add order to order, or chaos to chaos.) So tricksters are transformational, liminal figures, who defy expectations and subvert the preexisting order- but who therefore *require* predictions and structure to have any kind of impact or meaning at all. Playing a game requires there be rules; revealing a loophole requires there be a contract.

Within this definition, there's still a huge range of characters you can call tricksters, and it's useful to categorize them across spectrums. One axis of a trickster is "effectiveness", which refers to the trickster's ability to effect change; this is 'incompetent to competent', 'foolish to canny', 'harmless to dangerous'. Another axis is "motivation" which refers to the trickster's ethical structure; this is 'good to evil', 'generous to selfish', 'just to unjust'. There's another kind of axis that's related to motivation, which I'll call "comprehensibility", and which refers to the trickster's transparency of motive; the range there is 'knowable to unknowable', 'familiar to alien', 'clear to mysterious'. If you wanted to chart them all I'd make effectiveness the horizontal x-axis, motivation the vertical y-axis, and comprehensibility the z-axis perpendicular to both of them, but this is starting to get into 'gesturing at the wall map with crazy eyes' territory and I'm mostly just going to be talking about effectiveness and motivation anyway, so let’s move on.

Tricksters can be foolish figures, always getting caught, often the butt of their own joke. That's our early impression of Mat- a prankster who never really seems to get away with anything, or a fool caught in a trap of his own making. Mat is also generous, insofar as he has apparently been rescuing people his whole life, plus he's very 'easy come, easy go' about money, and has a decent instinct for gift-giving, whether those are compliments or actual physical presents. He has a strong sense of justice that puts him at odds with people who have (unearned) privilege and who are abusing power, and he loves verbally trapping people into confronting their own hypocrisy.

He keeps these traits throughout the series, but he also develops ones on the opposite side of the axes. Stealing the Shadar Logoth dagger is the catalyst for Mat's development from 'harmless, benevolent trickster' to 'dangerous, morally complicated trickster'. It literally overwrites first his personality, and then his memories. While he gets the personality back- sort of- he never gets the memories back, and his quest to do so sets him on the rest of his path.

By the end of the series, Mat has undergone enormous trauma and developed a much stronger sense of self-preservation. He becomes a canny and multi-talented figure, a brilliant tactician and strategist, a dangerous enemy to have. He's most selfish and cruel when under the influence of the Shadar Logoth dagger, but it turns out he's also never been in the rescuing business for free, he wants to be needed and will get a little pissy if he isn't (although to his credit, he respects people's wishes if they say they don't want to be saved from themselves.)

His greed for adventure and shiny things was what got him into trouble with the dagger, and he never quite loses his appraiser's eye (or taste) for luxury goods. And Tuon is entirely right to name him 'Devastation' or 'Ruin'; he's constantly blowing things up, killing enormous amounts of people directly or by proxy, and while everyone in this series commits war crimes, he's got the dubious honor of having another character (Teslyn) actually say to his face, "You know you just did a war crime, right?"

Mat spends the early books- when he's in good enough health to do so, and has the opportunity- pursuing women, wine, and song, and I mention them all together because that's the vibe he's going for. Mat genuinely loves flirting and dancing for their own sake, as fun things to do with receptive people, and that extends to sexual activities as well. It's a joyful, generous, playful way of interacting, and Mat's joie de vivre seems to attract people with similar attitudes.

Yes, Mat sometimes puts his foot in his mouth, but he's not actually disrespectful of anyone else's agency, so he's doing better than the rest of the Two Rivers boys. He doesn't make assumptions about whether there will be a next interaction or not, or how far each interaction will go; each step is negotiated with input from both players, which makes it a kind of game. Mat doesn't have long-term relationships with these fun, playful people, but he's not looking for that, and neither are they.

The other kind of people Mat is attracted to are what I'll call 'dagger people', who are sharp (smart, competent, possibly literally an edged weapon), powerful, and existentially dangerous. It is *possible* that Mat might have acquired this taste without the Shadar Logoth dagger's influence. He likes battles, he likes adventure, he generally treats women as respected equals, he might have gotten to 'date a woman who can kick your ass' all on his own. But Mat loved that Shadar Logoth dagger, they had a whole entire fucked-up relationship, and when they broke up he got a bunch of rebound knives and also some sharp, powerful, and existentially dangerous people's memories shoved into his head. Like calls to like, blood feeds blood, etc.

And boy, does Mat find these ladies, or more accurately, boy, do these ladies find him. Case in point: Melindhra, the sexy darkfriend Maiden of the Spear. I think Aludra partially fits, too- sharp, confident if not powerful, dangerous (though not so much to him as like... the world.) Mat isn't pursuing or attracted to either Joline or Tylin, but they also fit this description, and they definitely pursued him. (I'd love to add Lanfear to the list of 'dangerous ladies who made passes at Mat' but I can't quite do it with a straight face.) I don't think Mat's thing for dagger people really reaches its full flower until he starts getting to know Tuon, though.

Mat spends much of the series looking for both his types, and tends to find either one or the other, but not both in one person- until Tuon. Like Mat, Tuon is actually both these types in a sometimes uneasy coexistence. For all their many differences, they think about each other much the same way. They both find each other very layered and confusing, but also are surprisingly quick to trust each other, which is striking in people who are very suspicious, in a fraught situation, and on opposite sides. I think most of the reason they trust each other is because they have the same very contractual personal honor system, where 'my word is my bond'. That's a trickster thing; tricksters have to keep some kind of rules, or how else will they play games and know whether they've won or lost? But their rules can be hidden or idiosyncratic (that's the z-axis, comprehensibility) as you see in 'bargains with the fae'-type situations. Personal honor is also a feature of royalty, though, where the personal and political are bound together, and a person's promises can be treated as legal contracts, as well as honor-based societies in general.

Mat and Tuon take their promises to each other very seriously, but are also always both looking for loopholes so they can get the upper hand. They also are both following the script of prophecy, which I mention because they both devote a lot of time to subverting their own expectations about how exactly that prophecy is going to play out. Mat buckles down and says “I’m going to make this come out in my favor somehow, even though it’s not what I wanted,” yet he’s still surprised at how and when Tuon completes the marriage ceremony; Tuon does not find Mat anything like she expected, and she also is surprised at her own feelings for him. Near the end of the series, they take a break from playing tricks and mind games on each other, and instead bluff everyone else on the battlefield, tag-teaming their trickster powers for one last surprise attack.

Ok, so how is Tuon Mat’s first type, playful, joyful, and generous? She loves playing games with Mat, both actual literal games like stones, but also their weird flirting/power plays. She's super competitive, because anyone who wasn't who was in her shoes would be dead, but she's a good sport, "satisfied when she wins and determined when she loses". She's also got "mischievous" smiles, and turns the tables on Mat in a super trickster-y way, writing the letter that puts everyone in the circus under her protection except for Mat and his crew; which means he and his coterie are still 'not safe' and thus he has to keep travelling with her rather than bringing her back to Ebou Dar right away, by the terms of their promise.

Mat gives us really lovely descriptions of her in moments of joy, and one of the first things we learn about her is that her genuine smile makes her look completely different from the normal Resting Bitch Face she affects for self-preservation reasons. She's generous in the sense that she's (often) willing to consider other points of view and give people second chances, when others in her position wouldn't and don't. She has the generosity of privilege, which I admit is not the most laudable form of generosity, but it's still a form of generosity. She also has a natural compassion and merciful impulses that have been trimmed and hemmed and twisted into only the forms her society deems socially acceptable, but they're still there.

I have less of a job to do proving that Tuon is a 'dagger person'. You remember how I joked about 'sharp' meaning 'literally an edged weapon'? Well, I don't know how else I'm supposed to interpret "Tuon’s right hand swept across, bladed like an axe, and struck [the footpad's] throat so hard that he heard the cartilage cracking". SHE'S LITERALLY A WEAPON. MAT HAS FINALLY FOUND A REPLACEMENT FOR HIS SEXY EVIL KNIFE. :') She's also super smart, super canny, and a snappy dresser to boot. She's one of the most powerful women in the world, and by the end of the series Mat is absolutely into it. (The bit where he's like "She's so good at giving orders! *heart eyes*" is simultaneously hilarious and alarming. I get it- I simp for Kuvira from Legend of Korra, I can't throw stones at anyone who’s like ‘hot evil Empress, please step on me’- but there's a time and a place, Mat.)

And, of course, she's an existential threat to the world, Mat's family and friends, and (theoretically) Mat himself. The Seanchan Empire, despite not being bigoted towards the Tinkers and having pretty good gender equality, is committing massive human rights violations left and right, thanks to the slavery, channelerphobia, and imperialism. As a tool of the Empire, unless he works on extricating himself, Mat's going to be culpable for that (he already is, really, but it could be worse), which is a stain on his soul that I don't think either he or the readers want. Being a tool of the Empire is an existential threat to Mat's idea of himself as an independent agent and good person, and I guess also an existential threat to his life since he's getting all those assassination attempts from his coworkers. (I am excluding Tuon from the assassination attempts; as I've mentioned in a previous essay, her threats to Mat are not serious and are in fact a form of deranged flirting.)

Tuon and Mat are both dual-axis tricksters, in their way. Tuon- or I should really be saying, Fortuona, Lady Luck- is more on the bringing order to chaos side, and Mat falls most characteristically on the bringing chaos to order end of things. But they switch roles- Mat shores up the proper order of things when he reminds Tuon to keep her promises, and Tuon is often a chaotic influence at court, with her mercy or willingness to change her mind. They also both understand what it's like to be both a person and an archetype- Mat worries about losing his individual choice and freedom by becoming a hero, and Tuon worries about becoming too vulnerable and individual to be the strong and impartial hand she thinks the Empire needs.

They've also both experienced their instincts and worldview being overwritten by external forces; for Tuon it's been happening since birth and she's almost entirely embraced the process; for Mat, it was the consequence of a choice he made and he fought it every step of the way. They have very different responses, but they've experienced weirdly similar 'erasure' experiences. And they both have good and evil impulses entwined in complicated ways. Tuon is a survivor and a monster; a preserver and a destroyer; a person and an empire. And Mat builds a relationship with her when- and because- he accepts that he is both a lover and a fighter; generous and thieving; a person and a weapon. You may not like it, but this is what peak narrative compatibility looks like.

[unhealthyfanobsession]

hellllooooo!!! okay i would actually like to have a discussion about this. by no means is this any hate towards you or me trying to start an argument. just a civil disagreement re: your anti-neris/eris ask!!!

1. agree entirely with this point omggg nesta is literally an eris/rhys in female form without the added ambition, war crimes, and misogyny under her belt fr fr

2. OKAY LOVED BEST LAID PLANS QUEEN YOUR TALENT>>>> sorry love to see white men lose. here’s where i disagree tho. you say that eris saw nesta in a way that cassian didn’t/doesn’t. but i would argue that he does! eris clearly sees nesta as a prize worth having and a huge political advantage (which, duuuhh) but i would say cassian does too. in fact, i would go so far as to say cassian sees so much more than eris. he sees the power she holds in her humanity, in her trauma, and in everything she is beyond that. i think cassian does not let that be the only thing that defines her. that’s she’s a great weapon but that’s only one facet to who she is as a person. i think also saying that cassian didn’t want her as unapologetically or unashamedly as eris did is a little unfair to cassian and nessian’s story over all. their relationship dynamic’s exterior is more of a push/pull sort while their interior leaves a lot of things left unsaid. they’ve never had the clean slate of “seducing him with a dance” that eris had. and i 100% am with you, cassian did do some majorly questionable things (a discussion for another time, maybe. this one is already dragging its ass lmaoo) and i’m not excusing what he’s done but i think nitpicking a few wrongs out of the many and multiple good things cassian not only did for her but *with* her kind of cheapens nesta’s love for him a little bit but that’s maybe just more my opinion than anything else. ALTHOUGH I WILL SAY i’m kinda offended w this klaroline comparison queen. i get neris is fantasy and fun and whatever you wanna make it but c’monnnn klaroline king and queen of the screen UNTOUCHABLE UNREACHABLE PERFECTION…just can’t compare. also eris will never be babyklaus i’m sorry i’ll see myself out now pls don’t hate me.

3. YES! YES I AGREE. I AGREE NESTA OVER HUMANITY IM SO SERIOUS RN!!!! nesta archeron the woman that u are…

4. ooooh yep u got me there queen. may i offer, also: azriel. mysterious morally grey pretty bois will always trump whitehets for me ngl. THE ENEMIES TO LOVERS POTENTIAL!!!!

all in all, queen i truly truly deeply do not mean to offend you at all i just wanted to offer some food for thought and another perspective for the discussion!!! i love everything you write you’re literally the best nessian author fr you feed me all the time i have NOTHING BUT RESPECT FOR U!!!! love u love u love u

Hello hello - first of all when I said I was getting hate i 100% NEVER mean things like this. Respectful disagreement is important and fun. I’m literally a lawyer I promise to never be offended by stuff like this lol. I just kinda dipped out of my own messages for a while because I was over it.

Overall, I think the crux of everything I say with Neris is just the ✨fantasy✨ we don’t know what Eris would be like or how he would behave and we are annoyed with Cassian. The MAJOR issue I would say is that pretty much all of the good things Cassian did or affection he showed was before ACOSF and then he spent like half of THEIR BOOK being, if I may say so, a little bitch. He just never defended her until she started doing what he wanted essentially. I don’t think Cassian didn’t care. I think it’s clear he always cared and always wanted Nesta - but it’s the fact that this book was SO anticipated and we were waiting for a healing journey but it ended up being a drill sergeant. Annoyance with Cassian is kind of caked into annoyance with all of ACOSF, in my opinion. I’m not necessarily defending Eris and I don’t actually canon ship this couple, I’m more just explaining where the Neris shipping comes from in my opinion. Cassian was a total simp pre-ACOSF and we fell in love with that. There was the original tension of “calling her out” (eyeroll) but then his whole story was basically longing for and being the only one who understood Nesta. So the combo of the Cassian who actually understood Nesta being nowhere in site and this powerful sexy man being into Nesta and no questions asked wanting her … which was basically EXACTLY what we were all expecting from Cassian just amped everything up to a thousand. We were expecting pained sad boi longing as they healed together and instead we got forced into a house and “everyone hates you” and I think the collective attitude was well if she’s going to not have that epic love story then at least get her away from the IC and make her in charge of a Court thx. That was my mindset anyway. Again, I don’t think it’s actually where anyone felt the narrative going and it’s an over simplification but it was born from a lot of anger over a lot of different issues and character hypocrisies.

Also, to be clear, the Klaroline comparison was genre based only. Just the idea that an enemy becoming obsessed with one of the “good guys” and putting her first while her “boyfriend” is putting others before her is a very sexy vibe that we are all susceptible to. I do hate comparing Cassian to Tyler even a tiny bit … but yknow what if the growling and alpha male complex fit …