#i can probably write an entire essay about how much i love his character

[dramashii]

LI HONGYI as Xiao Se in THE BLOOD OF YOUTH (2022)

[abyssal-author-and-artist]

oh shit i just realized i forgot to post the trans dipper essay

oh well, better late than never!

Introducing - Why Mason "Dipper" Pines is Trans and Why that Matters - an essay I spent more time on than I did my actual college project today

Mason "Dipper" Pines from Gravity Falls is trans. Trans masculine, to be specific. Do I believe this was intentional? No. Do I believe that there's a seriously convincing case to be made? Fuck yes.

So first off, he's just like me frfr, which is pretty compelling in and of itself. But that's not enough for a whole essay, so we move onto our second point - character designs. Dipper is designed like, well, like every modern-era trans man I've ever drawn who isn't goth. The shorts, the one shirt in the one color, the absolute insecurity. He even does the hunch of the back! Also, I think I heard somewhere that the vest is to make his shoulders look broader, which I'm not entirely sure is canon but I am accepting this whole-heartedly. It's such a trans move of him. He's too young (and it's summer so it's too hot) to wear a dysphoria hoodie so he picked a vest. (I say too young because dysphoria hoodies usually cover your chest and Dipper and Mabel probably haven't hit puberty.)

The second part comes directly from science. According to this article, and many others, sex in identical twins is complicated, but most identical twins will be born the same sex. There are cases where this isn't true (which might be the case for Mabel and Dipper) or they might be fraternal, which is also pretty likely. However, looking at them when they were younger (and listening to their very similar voices), it's likely they were identical and both girls. That's not to say I dislike trans Mabel - every trans woman I draw dresses like her, so I do love her being trans as well and them hitting the age of like. 10. and swapping genders is incredibly funny and adorable to me.

So, we can't reliably use the aforementioned evidence, then, can we? After all, identical twins can be different sexes, although rare, and we don't have any proof they are identical beyond their visual (and when they were younger, audible) similarities. Well, first off, I'd say that's pretty compelling evidence already. In a cartoon, especially one as detailed and beautiful-looking as Gravity Falls (the art is good and I will die on this hill), visual language makes up for a lot. And Alex Hirsh has gone on record saying that he very much wanted Jason Ritter and Kristen Schaal for Dipper and Mabel respectively, to the point where he would have canceled the show if Kristen hadn't signed on, so I wholeheartedly believe every character (with the exception of Grenda and any other characters who had last minute va's picked) had their voice actors picked very specifically. I can't find whether Jason Ritter voiced younger Dipper, though, so that's a dead end.

Now, that's all well and good, but it's a lot of visual language, isn't it? Why don't we move into something more based in the writing itself?

So the first and most prominent example of Dipper being transgender is the episode Dipper vs Manliness. You know it, you probably have emotions on it, it's the episode where Dipper is trying his hardest to be a man's man. The episode was supposed to be about toxic masculinity and how to be a real man is to stick to your morals. It's a good lesson and in my opinion, holds up even in 2024. Pretty good. Does a great job of what it wants to do. Now, Dipper vs. Manliness has been dissected to hell and back already as a transgender allegory, so I'll keep this brief: the episode centers around Dipper being mocked for not being manly. While Mabel and Stan still see him as a man, albeit an effeminate one, it gets to Dipper. He proceeds to do anything to prove himself a real man. If viewed as a trans allegory, Mabel is teasing her brother and not realizing how deeply it actually hurts him (whether accidentally because she fails to realize how insecure he is over it or because she hasn't been there before, depending on how you want to headcanon it). As for Stan, I like to pretend he's supportive but regularly forgets Dipper was ever a girl, so he makes a serious slip up because of that (and/or he's regurgitating stuff said to him. That hits harder if you also headcanon trans Stan, which I am warming up to). Dipper proceeds to try and prove himself a man, crying when he takes even one more blow to his self esteem/sense of identity as a man, and eventually gets comfort from his family when they realize just how BADLY they messed him up. He is affirmed as a man and the episode ends. Everything that can be said, has been said - including that you don't have to act toxically masculine - or even masculine at all - to be a real man. Remember this part, it will be important later.

So, other trans moments for Dipper come a little sparser. Dipper vs. Manliness is the example for a good reason. But still, there's other moments. The short Voice Over from one of the short story compliation episodes is another one that's commonly referenced as a metaphor for voice dysphoria. Yes, Dipper's voice is cracking in ways common for a cis pre-teen boy his age, but the pitch and tone of his voice can also be seen as his more feminine voice peeking through. Taking the potion can be seen as taking testosterone or other hormones. Granted, this falls apart when you consider that Dipper is later discouraged from taking the potion, because that could be read as Dipper being discouraged from transitioning, but on the other side of the spectrum, it could be read as Dipper being affirmed as a real man despite his voice. From that perspective, his family prevents him from taking (possibly dangerous) homebrewed hrt. Also, the euphoria he gets when it does change his voice is just. Absolutely adorable.

Now, my favorite resource for Dipper acting trans is in the episode Headhunters. He's asking Manly Dan questions and Manly Dan calls Dipper a girl. And MAN the discomfort on Dipper's face. He immediately attempts to correct Manly Dan, but is shut down and the episode moves on. I think that for such a short moment, it does a good job of making Dipper seem trans, though. He is called a girl and feels extreme discomfort around it. He does not like being called a girl. He is not a girl. But he's not shocked or surprised or even really offended - he's resigned. He's used to being called a girl. Sure, he hates it, but he doesn't cry or scream or anything. Sounds to me like a trans man who's absurdly used to being misgendered but still hates it. That pain never goes away, but sometimes all you can do is flinch in discomfort, try to correct and move on, like the episode does.

For a (mostly humorous) video of more of Dipper acting trans, check out this video.

So I think we've made a pretty compelling point for Dipper Pines being trans masc here. Looks pretty good, yup, this is a great essay, let's wrap it up. Oh? What's that? The name of this essay?

Why Mason "Dipper" Pines is transgender and why that matters.

Well, let's dive into section two of this essay - why does Dipper being trans matter?

Someone could easily say it doesn't matter. Just fun fandom headcanons, that's it, wrap it up now. Nothing more to say. Dipper is trans and that's just a fun reading of his character.

But I don't think that's the case. I think that Dipper being trans means so much - to trans fans of the show, to fans who have never seen or spoken to trans people before, and to queer fans of Gravity Falls and similar shows. (I personally am a Steven Universe fan who really valued the representation there, so Gravity Falls and all it's queer coding means a lot to me.)

First and foremost, I'm not going to keep you in the dark as to why you're remembering my earlier point. As a recap, it was this: Dipper vs. Manliness, and by proxy, Gravity Falls as a whole, says that you don't have to be traditionally masculine to be a real man. For a show that spends a lot of time mocking a kid commonly headcanoned to be a trans man, that says a lot, and a lot of stuff I think more people need to hear.

You do not need to act like your gender to be your gender.

You do not need to present like your gender to be your gender.

You do not need to fit some rigid box that society enforces to be who you are.

If you are a man, you are a man, trans or cis, regardless of how you act. (And the same goes for women and nonbinary people! You don't have to fit a mold.)

You don't owe anyone anything.

You don't owe people masculinity. (Or femininity or androgyny for that matter.)

I think that's part of the reason Dipper vs. Manliness ages so well. Dipper reads as trans, especially to queer fans, and his story in that episode tells us that we don't have to be someone we're not for people to take us seriously as who we are. At the end of the day, the really masculine thing is staying true to you - a sentiment echoed and reversed in The Last Mabelcorn, where the most feminine thing you can do is to stay true to yourself. I can't find it right now, but I could swear that there's a That GF Fan video explaining my point a little better. The point is, there's nothing that makes you more of whatever your gender is than staying true to yourself.

Additionally, if Dipper really is trans and someone sees themself in him, that can help them explore their gender or explain it to other people. Young kids who have never interacted with trans people before can see Dipper and grow up to connect the dots - or grow up to have him crack their eggs.

I know I'm new to the fandom and I was already out before watching the show, but he really helped me explore my gender. I like dressing like him - he's very relatable, even though I'm old enough to be in college now. I see him as a very anxious, slightly paranoid trans kid, and I see a lot of myself in him. He has a lot of issues, and a lot of issues that aren't trans specific but definitely hit harder when you are trans. He makes me feel seen on a level that I never thought a cartoon character could do.

Honestly, here would be a good place to put a rant about representation in kids media - queer kids under the age of 12 exist and struggle. I liked a girl (before realizing I was trans) in fifth grade, so about 9 years old. There are kids who experiment with their gender when they're younger than that. We're here and we exist, and every single time a character in children's media is made and is prevalent, another kid is able to really see themself.

That's really the point of this section. Dipper is trans. That matters. People - mostly queer kids but people of all ages - see themselves in him. He's here and we see him as queer because it's validating. It feels so good to hear Stan affirm him at the end of Dipper vs. Manliness, because it proves that at the end of the day, you don't need to present as super masc or femme or androgynous to be who you are.

Gravity Falls, through coding Dipper as trans, sent a message:

You are seen. You are loved. You are valid.

Thank you for reading this all. Trans Dipper means a lot to me, and I love writing him and seeing him in general. I want more of him because Dipper being trans means the world to me.

I love you all. Have a wonderful day. Remember to stay true to yourself.

[connect404]

So I saw this tweet earlier Abt the dynamic between Stanford and fiddleford during the partnership and how similar it was to Stanford and bill's dynamic (incoming essay)

AND I COMPLETELY AGREE

As much as I love fiddauthor (or just ford and fiddleford in general) , fiddleford doesn't deserve the type of treatment he got from Ford.

Throughout the entire partnership,ford treated him poorly and only ever cared about him if it was related to the portal. Fiddleford was willing to work with him even though he knew he was being treated poorly,not to mention he didn't know abt bill or his intentions yet (at the time) and still had his suspicions while working with ford. He remembered to give ford a gift (hand-knitted special gloves for him to wear with several failed attempts beforehand AND a snoglobe of the shack) yet forgot to get a gift for his own wife.

He does all this but the second he tells ford that the portal is dangerous and should be destroyed,ford gets angry at him and says he doesn't need him ???

That's not to say ford isn't completely a POS , he does enjoy fiddleford's company and his partnership with him. Ford even gets closure with fiddleford and actually apologizes to him for all the shit he did to him. Ford gets character development for the most part and actually becomes a somewhat decent person. He's terrible but that's what makes him a great character. He does horrible things but also acknowledges he did said things and actively tries to not do that,even if it's hard to avoid it.

(op said he's objectively an awful person for what he did but also loves him anyway because that type of writing is what makes his character compelling and honestly I relate)

It's a shame that ford favours results over sympathy/empathy. He only ever cares people when they are of use to him and when they say something he doesn't wanna hear,he throws them to the side and searches for another.

Another thing Abt ford is that he tends to be stubborn and an egoist. No matter the situation,he always puts himself before others. This can be a good thing sometimes (like when he gets electrocuted instead of just giving bill the equation) but it's always shown in a negative light. Stan dedicated almost his entire life to bring back his brother after several decades and he never even got a thank you or when instead of hearing Stan out on that invention he broke in highschool, he just let his brother get kicked out (Ik the twins are kinda crappy people but Stan breaking ford's perpetual motion machine was an accident damnit. It's been 30+ years and he still won't let it go 😭😭)

DESPITE SAYING ALLAT....ford isn't completely to blame for his behavior and how he treats other people around him to the point of being manipulative. Sure,his main flaws are what make him act this way (insecurity,need to be better than others,doesn't really think of others,etc.) but I think the only reason they've become worse is because of bill and how he manipulated ford,basically feeding into his ego and validating his beliefs. That, combined with his occasional selfish urges makes him want more.

More knowledge.

More praise.

More fame.

And this need for more makes him impatient. So much so that he starts using the same manipulation tactics (whether intentionally or unintentionally I'm not sure) bill used on him on fiddleford to try and get the same results,since said tactics work on him,so it would makes sense for him to do the same.

TL;DR yes,ford is a bad person but he's a bad person with layers and that's why I love him sm. Also fiddleford deserved better treatment

Anyway this'll probably get like 5 likes but uhhhh I'd love to hear any take on this really.

Agree,disagree I'd love it hear it

[wisecrackingeric-2]

LONG ASS MESSAGE UNDER CUT!!!!!!!!!!!! ITS A MASSIVE THANK YOU TO EVERYONE!!! I’ll tag everyone whose made a star for this drawing in the replies- if I’ve missed anyone or if you wanna be added, PLEASE LET KNOW!!!!!!!

At the time of writing this, there’s about 40 minutes let of 2023, and I’m VERY DETERMINED to get this posted before 2024 so I am in a bit of a rush so alas, this may not be as well-written as I’d like it to be but that’s the price I must pay alas HDNEHENEJDN

I wanna start this by saying I’ve always had a lot of anxieties surrounding the New Years, and things changing- even just seeing posts that were from the year prior always seems to give me anxiety. Things change, people move on, while I stay with the same interests- it’s always been something I’ve struggled with, but making this has helped me come to terms with all of that and I’m glad.

Theres no better words I can say right now other than; Thank You. Thank you so, so, SO much to my friends, both new and old- my friends who’ve been here since the very beginning and have stuck by me through this whole rollercoaster- and to all of my new friends, who it sometimes feels like I’ve known you all for at LEAST five years and not like, five months or something HDBWHNWUDNDHDJS thank you to everyone who has ever been kind to me, supported me and enjoyed what I’ve created- I’ve recieved probably the kindest words I’ve ever heard in my entire life this year. Thank you to the people who stuck by me when times got tough and helped me through my own seemingly very insignificant or silly problems HDNEJENSK

This year has easily been one of the best years of my life. 2022, to keep it short, was awful- I came out as a Transgender gay man to my parents and it went awful. I was dealing with the worst mental health of my entire life and there were times it felt like there was no hope. On top of all of that, my childhood dog passed away- so all and all, I wasn’t looking forward to the future. But my loving partner introduced me to Resident Evil, and as a result the community as a whole- and to say it changed my life would be an understatement.

I know it’s obviously no secret that I have a favourite character, Luis Serra Navarro- but to say his character has changed me as a person for the better would also be a MASSIVE understatement. I’ve never ever in my entire life resonated with a character so profoundly before- as a queer and trans man, I saw myself reflected in his performance, and that means more to me than words can even describe. His character encapsulated me in a way no other has done before, and genuinely helped me accept my autism, my queerness and my trans identity as a good thing- I could write absolutely ESSAYS on his character and I have. I’ve consumed more Don Quixote media than I think I ever would have otherwise HDNEHENEJD and to say I’ve genuinely become a more confident and happier person because of his character would, again, be SUCH an understatement. It’s truly hard to describe how much he means to me, but I hope my words give a good idea.

For the first time in a very, very long time, I get to look forward to my future. I don’t see my Queerness or my Trans identity as a setback anymore; I have things to look forward to, plans I’ve made and a future I can look towards. And I cannot thank my friends- all of you know who you are- André and Andrea and everyone in my life and this small little community I’ve unintentionally formed for giving me that opportunity. Words will never be able to describe how grateful I truly am, but I hope this is close enough.

Thank you for letting me fully indulge in my autism and enjoy Luis’ character to the fullest. I’ve never felt happier enjoying something in my entire life.

Thank you everyone. For everything. May you all successfully defeat your own windmills <3

[ladysomething]

I know that writing is not a simple matter, but I didn't expect to consider so much. Thank you and SaiyanWitcher for creating such a wonderful fic.

I think this has gone beyond the ordinary fic, since you have created a character like wygig Charles. This is more like a serious thing.

I really hope Charles can win WDC.

I'm still a little worried about whether the contract will strike out in the follow-up content.

God, I can't imagine what a nightmare it would be for Charles to reauction. And what Max would definitely do to protect his beloved Omega.

thank you for your kind words. there is an extensive amount of work that goes into a fic like wygig, and both @saiyanwitcher and I really appreciate it whenever people mention it. it makes us feel warm and gooey haha.

also because you have specifically mentioned Charles, I do feel like I want to ramble about him a little bit, particularly in light of the US election yesterday.

I always knew that wygig, and Charles in particular, were a vehicle for telling a deep and complex story about gender, a woman's place in the world, and the complexity of being in love with somebody who fits into all the traditional moulds of upholding societal values.

partly this is because of my own interest in gender and gender politics - as I mentioned a few days ago, I've studied it in the past.

partly this is because when SaiyanWitcher told me that she would like for me to write an omegaverse fic, I knew the only way I would want to do it was if I had something to say. reading essays on omegaverse and whether they are subversive or uphold traditional gender dynamics was how I realised that I wanted to fit into a bit of both: be subversive by making commentary on our system through omegaverse.

however, the longer I've been writing this (January will mark a year since I wrote the first chapter), it's become more and more a Point for me. wygig is not just a romance with a side of commentary, the entire point of it is to critique gender roles and gender politics.

the biggest and most obvious example on this is obviously Charles avoiding all of the things that mark a traditional omega (nesting, scenting, even having heats), but also in his journey with wanting kids.

obviously he rejected everything in the past, but that's not really a way for him to live. he was effectively denying himself his wants and needs, just because he hated his second gender and what it meant for him.

ultimately his journey is about reconciling the two halves of himself: his hopes and dreams, with his wants and needs.

max, of course, makes up a huge part of that. Max has, for the majority of the story so far, been a huge obstacle in Charles' path of self realisation and acceptance, because he has been the picture of a traditional alpha, and of somebody trying to oppress Charles (yes, of course that wasn't his intention, but he still did it - also its own point).

But Max's part in Charles' journey is to uplift him. To give a voice to him, and his needs, and to make him feel safe. His role in Charles' gender journey is protect him by allowing him the space to be who he is. His role is to do for Charles the things he simply can't for himself because of his gender: to be publicly equal to Charles, to give him the tools he needs to amplify his voice, and to meet Charles half way with love and support and zero self interest.

anyway. I know that probably makes wygig a little too real for people, and I have been told multiple times in the past that it's difficult to read/triggering, because of how deeply it explores these topics. of course I understand that - it was designed to be difficult to read.

but I'm so happy that so many of you are along for the journey, and love and appreciate what I'm trying to do with this beast.

[thisbarbiereallylikesbirds]

Aly do u prefer yoshi + splinter being the same character or separate? could u rank the yoshis/splinters from your least favorite to most favorite? thank u!

Good question!!

Personally, I prefer it when they're the same character, it's just more interesting in my opinion. Now, that's not to say that Splinters that start out as a rat can't have cool backstories (I actually really like 03 Splinter's), but I always find myself more intrigued if they used to be human. It really allows the writers to dig into what it would be like for someone to suddenly not be human anymore. Plus the idea of a guy getting turned into a rat and then turning around and being like "I guess the only course of action is to raise four turtles in the sewers" is really funny to me. It definitely takes a specific person for that to be their first course of action.

And, of course, if he was human first that means he probably had a close relationship with Tang Shen. I wrote an entire essay on why she's such an interesting character to me so I won't get into that here, but getting to hear about her from a primary (and often biased) source is really fun. I love characters that haunt the narrative.

Now I've only ever seen Rise, 03, and MM/Tales in full. I've seen a few episodes of 2012 but 87, the comics, and all other iterations aren't gonna be included since I don't know enough about them.

Rise Splinter. What can I say. I made the Nameless Trio just to put this idiot and his friends in situations and watch how they react. His past with the Hamato Clan, the whole Lou Jitsu era, and the Battle Nexus era are all super interesting to me, plus I love reading and writing little fics where this man who had no intention of ever even interacting with a child suddenly has to raise four of them. While he's not always the best father (or the best person if we're being so real) it's clear that he loves his kids.

03 Splinter. This guy is just...the sweetest I can't even. In my opinion he's the best dad out of all the Splinters (at least the ones I've seen). I mean he literally used to be a rat, and yet is a good father even by human standards (it's my personal head canon that he had a rat family before at some point so he does have practice raising kids, but still). I love how Yoshi would just bring him literally everywhere, I love how much he cares. He's just great.

2012 Splinter. Now I know some people really hate this guy, and like I said early I haven't seen the whole series. However. This man has a cheese phone and runs on a wheel. He committed to the bit and I have to respect that. Plus, his whole backstory with Karai and Shen is super interesting to me. And in my opinion Splinter and Shredder being brothers is an elite choice. The obvious favoritism of his children isn't great, but I can appreciate a complex character.

Mutant Mayhem/Tales Splinter. I'm gonna be so honest I don't know if we've really seen enough of this guy for me to have a super concrete opinion on him. In my review of TOTTMNT I did talk about how annoying it was to have him just speak vermin, and I do still stand by that. That being said, I don't hate him. It's obvious that he cares about his kids and wants the best for him. I've seen some theories that maybe he was lying about his past and used to be Hamato Yoshi. Personally I don't buy it, but due to my personal preferences I do kinda hope that's the case lol.

This ended up being a lot longer than i thought it would be!! I hope you enjoyed me rambling about the old rat man.

Thanks for the ask!!

[lousyglitch]

Scott pilgrim takes off inhabits the same artistic space as the matrix 4, or even the final fantasy 7 remake. I mean this as a good thing. It has the distinct touch of an artist that made something that defined a generation revisiting the art that outgrew them a thousandfold with more maturity and different interests.

These interests usually skew meta, they're about what drives someone to revisit something made by a past version of oneself, about the experience of suddenly gaining more influence than anyone could reconcile, where criticisms of your work (which you also, no doubt, have many) become synonymous with criticisms of your culture. If you've been here a while, you probably know (and are tired of) what I'm talking about, manic pixie dream girls and aloof average male protagonists, toxic nostalgia, pick your theme and it's a video essay title.

Imagine having every read of your 2004 funny video game-coded coming of age comic reverberate infinitely toward every direction, people saying your main character taught a whole generation of men to be self-absorbed while the exact opposite type of people rant about how your secondary lead "ruined a whole generation of women" because of hair-dye or whatever. Imagine Edgar Wright makes a movie adaptation of your cute little comic that somehow launches the careers of half of the current celebrity pantheon simultaneously. How would that change you?

Well, for one, it makes you less relatable. The truth of an aloof nerdy guy dating in his early 20s is a lot more universal than the truth of an artist in his 40s forever defined by the event horizon of a thing he wrote half his life ago. The matrix 4 couldn't stop talking about how it feels to have created the matrix. The final fantasy 7 remake can't help but to constantly examine what it means to remake final fantasy 7. It's easy to see why someone would hate that indulgent meta trend, I'll probably never write a generation-defining story, why would I care about the first world problems of someone who did? It can feel distant, and at its worst it can feel insulting. Like it's pointing the finger at the fans, whispering 'you did this to me'. I get that.

I get that, but I love it.

It's the fundamental difference between wanting something that is like something you liked, and wanting someone that is from the same creator of something you liked. The difference between feeding the mona lisa into an AI and finding a new authentic da Vinci. You can't make something entirely new if you religiously stick to using the parts of something that's already there. The human behind the work will always have influences you didn't realize, thought patterns and aesthetic preferences that weren't entirely clear in their previous work, no matter how much you deconstruct it. More importantly, the human will also change, and this organic self-continuity will reflect on the art. I don't want the creator of something to hold their own creation with the same zeal as its fans, because someone who did that simply wouldn't have been capable of creating the original piece in the first place.

I don't want a product, I want art.

Scott pilgrim, the original, indulges the most earnest impulse we have-- that of self-mythologizing, of creating a narrative off of our own lives. To depict the mundane as fantastic, interpersonal relationships as adventures. It resonated with so many people because it was earnest, and it was also picked apart to hell and back because it was earnest. Its flaws were on display, and not just the ones it intended to show. But in my opinion, the opposite impulse, that of washing off everything that could be criticized and presenting the cleanest possible image of yourself through your art, is just... bad. it makes for bad art, or it just freezes you. The very first hurdle of creating anything is getting over that, then maybe the spotlight will fall on you. If it does, you'll get everything you ever wanted, but everyone gets to see through you.

So, how do you revisit something like that? You have two options. Either you take all the pieces and try to reassemble them exactly how everyone remembers it, signing your name as a formality, looking at a mirror in which you no longer see yourself, or you talk to it. You dialogue with your own work, with who you used to be. You travel in time and talk to yourself. You question them, acknowledge them but also teach them a thing or two. You don't respect the product, you respect the feeling. You find the same earnestness that made you put pen to paper for the first time, and you point it towards your new loves and fears. Maybe you make it less about the main guy, take the chance to develop your secondary characters, maybe you give the girl more agency. Maybe you summon the future and refuse its answers. Maybe you fight yourself.

That's the harder choice. It submits your new self to the scrutinizing eyes of a whole new generation, it risks alienating the people who identified with your previous piece. It's riskier, probably less profitable, and by any pragmatic lens probably a bad idea. But it's the only way you can make art. It's truth, the truth that got you there in the first place.

It's how you get it together.

[gartenofbanny]

Andrealphus's first appearance in Unhappy Campers was probably the most mediocre introduction in all of Helluva Boss thus far. Andrealphus had no build-up aside from a single line Stolas said in The Circus.

Instead, Andrealphus has been moreso built up as a character outside of the series entirely. Tweets made by Vivziepop releasing his design and describing his role

This is one of my main issues with Andrealphus's introduction as a whole. He wasn't introduced within the series itself but on Twitter. Keep in mind that he is supposed to be a major antagonist, and usually antagonists who are major have introductions within the series. But maybe he does have an introduction within the series with dramatic effect behind it..right?

Right?

When Western Energy released 13 seconds into the episode, Andrealphus just appears.

No entrance, no in-show introduction, no explained role, just nothing. Andrealphus just appears as if he's always been in the series. This is the worst villain introduction I've seen in Helluva Boss because there was no introduction within the show.

It's like the writers had no idea how to introduce him within the show and just tweeted who he is and what his role is and called it a day. That's not how any character introduction works because they're essentially spoiling their audience. Instead of building him up within season 1, giving the audience something to theorize and talk about, eventually paying off with an appearance they just do "Hey, here's this character that will appear in a future episode! Let us explain to you who he is instead of letting you put the pieces together yourselves!"

So, I'm going to bring up one of my favorite introductions to an antagonist in fiction. You all have heard of Dragon Ball Z, right? Well, here's how one of the main antagonists, Cell, was introduced.

Words can not express how much I love this introduction, why it has a great build up, and how it's fucking terrifying. But I don't feel like explaining right now.

So now that you all watched the video or have already seen it, Lets try something different. Remove the majority of the video, immediately cut to Piccolo facing Cell with Cell already absorbed the last citizen of the city and Piccolo about to fight Cell while screaming his name. That doesn't work because two things are missing.

And that is the build-up and

ACTUAL INTRODUCTION

This is why Andrealphus's introduction into Helluva Boss is mid (if you can even call it an introduction), Andrealphus had no actual introduction within the series aside from a throwaway line a couple episodes before and no actual introduction within the series either. Andrealphus just appears in Western Energy, and the episode acts as if like the audience already knows who he is and what he does.

Newsflash, we don't. Well, we know who he is, but that information was given outside the show. Because for some REASON, Viv and Spindlehorse write their characters outside of the show.

-Insert Millie thread reference here-

Am I expecting Helluva Boss to have Dragon Ball Z's level of writing? No, it's Helluva Boss, lmao. But I did expect it to have a decent villain introduction, especially when the villain is really major. Helluva Boss has had pretty decent villain introductions and twists with Martha and Striker. Hell, in my opinion, the DHORK Agents had the best introduction thus far, but it just fumbled the bag with Andrealphus.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Andrealphus's introduction sucked and he's honestly just painfully boring as an antagonist overall, but that'll be a topic for a different essay. That's all I have for today. Thank you all for reading, and I hope you all have a great one! ❤️

[kebriones]

it is entirely out of character for alcibiades to say "i hate myself" given that he is literally the Best at everything he does. if the ancient aristocrats like plato or alcibiades failed, then they would just get better by sheer resource of their genius; they would never even express self-pity bc it would be shameful. alcibiades' exceptional traits and ability to adapt to any situation stem from supreme self-confidence, never self-doubt or self-hatred

For anyone reading this, this is in reference to my fanfic which is a modern university AU which is heavily out of character for everyone involved anyways, and which I wrote on a whim while waiting for painkillers to kick in, in my bed. So please forgive any out of characterness, it's all just for fun. However, I don't think that particular bit was out of character for him, so here comes the essay.

I take a lot of how I characterize alcibiades in my fics from plato. If you read plato's symposium, the self-hatred, self-pity and self-deprication is very much there in alcibiades' speech. When he's with socrates, he says he feels like he can't stand his own life because he sees his deficiences and his mistakes. He understands that if he's to stay with socrates he must let go of many other things he wants and he can't do that, and he's saying outright how ashamed he is of himself when he meets socrates and has to admit certain things. In the Alcibiades 1, he is even more humbled by his shortcomings, expresses opn self-doubt and confusion.

This is what makes alcibiades so interesting and multi dimensional. He's at once extremely aware of his shortcomings AND extremely confident in himself, ashamed of himseld BUT ALSO has a bloated sense of ego. This conflict is very obvious in how plato writes him. And, for plato to write these things, he must also have some knowledge of such internal conflicts. If socrates was as he's presented, associating with him would make going through this humbling necessary.

Both in Plutarch and in Xenophon, we have alcibiades showing fear and uncertainty (when he's afraid to disembark immediately after returning to peiraius, even though he had been recalled to ahtens for a couple years at that point and had won her many victories)

This might be my subjective reading of his speeches, but I feel that in terms of expressing self-pity, he does so in thucydides, xeonophon and plutarch. He often laments the injustices done to him in his public speeches. For the speech he gives upon returning to athens, plutarch says "He lamented and bewailed his own lot, but had only little and moderate blame to lay upon the people. The entire mischief he ascribed to a certain evil fortune and envious genius of his own."

We must understand that alcibiades' ego didn't stop him from being a master manipulator. Andocides wrote that alcibiades has no problem with using tears and begging when it comes to gaining something for himself.

anyways yeah I feel kind of strongly about this because it's such a core conflict of his character, especially in plato's writtings, and a very interesting one at that. You have someone who's behaving as if he's so much better and above everyone else, and probably believes it most of the time, but when he's with socrates, he is forced to see that this isn't true. In the Alcibiades 1, this is exactly what socrates uses to make alcibiades see that he needs socrates if he is to become great. Because it's only socrates that can show him his deficiences, and again in plutarch it's said explicitly that this is why alcibiades respected and loved socrates above everyone else, because he humbled him and he was smart enough and self-aware enough to understand, at least sometimes, that this was necessary if he was to become as good as possible.

[olderthannetfic]

https://www.tumblr.com/olderthannetfic/740136068340482048/the-funniest-dni-i-ever-encountered-in-all-my-12?source=share

As a House Martell stan, it's been interesting to watch the evolution of that particular corner of the ASOIAF fandom over the years. For a while, because they were less present on the show (and their actual focus on the show was pretty bungled), they were mostly the favorites of superfans who'd read the books and therefore were deeply devoted to the whole ASOIAF universe, and given how much that means memorizing various types of Targaryen incest over the years, were almost never antis. A lot of people were also drawn to that they were the ~sexy, liberated house, as well as there being a fair number of POC who identified with some of the few non-white people in those books who were actually fully-realized characters (in the books, not so much in the show). IME it was usually people who were also shipping a lot of the other popular "problematic" ships in the fandom like Jaime/Cersei and Sansa/Petyr Baelish.

Then, at some point - particularly after the show ended and the fandom shrunk a lot - it got infected with a bunch of people writing long essays about how Daenerys and the entire Targaryen family were inherently "white supremacist" (previously, it had been more common for POC and other fans who focused on anti-racism to stan Daenerys, and point out that what the final season did with her was some white bullshit that tried to conflate killing oppressors like slavers with killing poor downtrodden people) and there ended up being a fandom fight between those people who saw the Targaryens as the more racist house or the Starks, but they all stanned Martells but in a very shallow sort of way just because they were the POC house. It's also worth nothing that Dorne has equal primogeniture - women can inherit, and in the books it's Doran's eldest daughter, Arianne, who is his heir, even though he has two younger sons - and it also is more accepting of LGBTQ+ people and bastards and general "sex outside of marriage" than most of the rest of Westeros, so it attracts a lot of people who are into them for that reason. I mean, I like them for that reason among others, but of course that's going to be a magnet to people who want to prove that they're extra special progressive for stanning them over like, the Lannisters.

Also, probably worth noting, the people in the second group were generally younger. Book-centric fans generally tend to be older IME in ASOIAF fandom. I feel like whenever a fandom is younger, there's more likely to be more anti behavior.

Anyway it was very weird to get back into ASOIAF when I read Fire and Blood and then when House of the Dragon started airing, and feeling like "my corner" of the fandom had become completely unrecognizable in my absence.

Also, I suspect it's probably drawing in some people who just really like Pedro Pascal. (It was better when it was drawing in the Alexander Siddig stans from DS9 fandom, snerk. Although even that fandom has had an obnoxious influx of younger purity-policing virtue-signalling types discovering it these days, writing stupid discourse about how Garak/Garashir is problematic and people should instead ship characters who don't like each other that much and don't interact much one-on-one because the combinations of them are more progressive or something.... sigh! Anyway, probably not helped by the fact that Game of Thrones completely wasted him, even though his character was one of the best ones in the books and a big one that drew me into loving House Martell. He would've been great as book!Doran, but alas....)

I'm also going to say that as others have pointed out, I'll always be mystified by the fact that ASOIAF even HAS antis. If you're that opposed to incest, age-disparate relationships, violence, etc. anything controversial, how can you stan the actual canon of that show? Or the books, which arguably have even more rape and incest and ephebephilia going on. It just seems like you'd have to have a very adversarial relationship with canon to a point that I just don't understand why you don't pick another fandom. Of course, it's probably really just that antis are hypocrites.

--

Hypocrites, yes. But also drawn to material that they're not comfortable being drawn to. The younger they are, the more the cognitive dissonance makes them act out.

I don't condone it, but I do understand it.

[littlespoonevan]

Hi, can I please ask for some of the essays about the cemetery talk and what we were supposed to take away from that scene? If you feel inclined, that is 💕

well i don't know if i can write an essay exactly bc tbh i still don't know for certain what we're supposed to take away from that scene. but i do know the tone of it was completely different to anything we've ever seen for buddie before and it also lasted so much longer than most of their scenes have before??? like i just went back to rewatch it to refresh my memory and it's 3 minutes???? that is an incredibly long scene for two characters to have in an ensemble show when they're literally just talking and it's not strictly moving the plot forward

but to try and break it down a bit:

i find it fascinating the way eddie reacts to buck talking about natalia. that weary, almost irritated, "really?" when buck admits he'd met up with her followed by the "dating somebody you rescued, you know what never ends well." it's So Different to the snarky way he used to react to taylor. like when he'd make comments about taylor you knew he was mostly joking or at worst, just being a little bitchy. but he sounds genuinely frustrated when buck brings up natalia. the closest thing i can compare it to is that it's a more muted version of "his fiance's abby" and we know eddie knew how deeply buck was affected by losing abby so it feels a bit like eddie is potentially annoyed bc he knows buck will probably get hurt again???

then you have buck saying the whole "i think she sees me" bit which echoes so much of buck's overarching storyline and his struggle with love in the past. and i know some people call this eddie's 'oh' moment but i definitely don't consider it an "oh i'm in love with him" moment. i feel like it's more of an "oh he doesn't see that i see him too" moment, if that makes sense?? and i think there probably is a bit of frustration with that for eddie given that the will scene is eddie as loudly and demonstratively as he can saying "i see you" y'know? nevermind all the little ways he proves he knows buck

and tbh i think my favourite part of the scene is actually the last 60 seconds because first you have eddie saying "you haven't been the same since it happened, but then again how could you be?" and it's just!!! 1) it's literally him proving he does see buck and probably knows him better than anyone else and 2) there's a very subtle hint of realisation in his voice when eddie says "how could you be" as if he's been convincing himself buck is fine this entire time (maybe post-couch nap) only for him to now realise buck really, really isn't.

tHEN he says "you don't have to be anything for anybody" and it might be my favourite words to ever come out of his mouth tbh because it's just once again emphasising the gentle way eddie lets buck be?????????? "i had to do it" "i know you did", "you knew i wouldn't" "i knew you wouldn't". eddie is So Good at offering buck a reprieve whenever he needs one and he's usually the person best able to break through all the noise in buck's head to make him understand that he's fine just existing as himself.

aND THEN eddie makes the comment about how going through near death experiences change a person and all i can think about is how after eddie's near death experience he made the decision to tell buck about his will after keeping it a secret for a year and how he never actually answered buck's question about why he kept it a secret in the first place and i have to ask, eddie diaz what changed in you???????????

combine all of that with the fact their outfits mirror what they wore in 5x14 and the absolute irony of eddie saying dating someone on a call never works out only for him to pursue marisol two eps later and just- i don't know if they pivoted bc there was a fear season 6 would be the end of the series or if the last few eps were always supposed to go the way they did but this scene in 6x15 raises so many questions and i feel like i don't have the answers to any of them skjahd

[deconstructivesurgery]

plspls PLEASE tell me anything youd like about owb...... im playing through nv for the first time and have yet to get to the dlc.... i have a passing knowledge of it but not much, and i am obsessed with these mad robobrain 2.0s and their relationships with each other and the courier

oh god almighty i don't even know where to START. i have gone insane over this specific DLC in the past to such a ridiculous extent that i'm in the middle of making an actual informative essay about it. styled the same way i write actual academic papers. i think i hauve COVID or whatever.

Off the top of my head, one of the things I love the most about OWB at first glance is the way it beautifully ties into the world of the Mojave itself and the other story DLCs (minus Honest Hearts) in subtle and yet fascinating ways that are a lot of fun to discover yourself or to tie together. Playing the NV DLCs, you'll find Big Mt.'s work in places you'd barely expect- slowly piecing together with every new bit of information the extent to which some of their work "breached containment", so to speak. You'll also find ties to other DLC stories scattered throughout the DLC area itself, keepng a beautoful, believable coherence between OWB and the outside story. It's an absurd, comedic terror of a DLC, to be sure- and yet, it's so grounded in the world of Fallout that I find it doesn't wreck your disbelief. Like some OTHER bizarro Fallout content has for me in the past. Looking at you, "Zetans" bullshit that I hate.

I'm also a big fan of the environmental storytelling throughout the entire DLC- something as simple as exploring the homes of the Think Tank in their secluded little vault-esque shelter (where I presume they sheltered out PART of the war before transferring to the brain tanks for longevity, OR which they potentially just lived in Pre-War) can tell you so much about their characters that you'd just never really pick up otherwise. The characters are simultaneously hilarious and... I mean. Heart-wrenching if you're willing to let your heart bleed for a bunch of demented amoral scientists whose entire Pre-War job was to try and resolve the war in America's favour in the nastiest ways possible. I personally find something so compelling in the unique ways their memories and personalities are equal parts warped by the passage of time and the recursion loops impacting their thoughts, and true to the people they were Pre-War.

(If I'm being vague about a lot of this, it's because I think some things are fun to find yourself and if I explained everything I liked about the DLC I'd probably just end up rehashing every single character and most of the plot points in the entire thing.)

Also it's just straight up fucking yonkers over bonkers. You get called a Lobotomite. You get to watch the world's worst co-workers (who have been cooped up in robot bodies living in a state of induced dementia together for the past god-knows-how-long) argue with each other like the world's pissest pack of schoolchildren. You get to hear some guy shriek at you about the terrors of Communism and the horrors of his high-school nemesis RICHIE FUCKING MARCUS for a solid five minutes. The entire thing starts off with an absurdly long insane conversation cutscene. One of the Think Tank members also like canonically cums in your gun. What's not to love, I guess.

[loquarocoeur]

Hey lovely! I’m back w another anon, at this point I’ll put an emoji so you know it’s the same person saying hi bc I’m not sending this on my blog name but ashshsjsh.

The asks and your responses on the spanking shit have me wanting to send this ask that I’ve been thinking about, but like. After the end of ‘pushing buttons’ I rlly enjoyed the bit where charles was almost insecure, and max responded the way he did so beautifully about how he loves charles the most bc he’s charles and what about it him he finds so loving and hot and how he was mentioning Charles’s pleasure too and that just. Really made me want to have a fic perhaps on the doms pleasure a bit. Not entirely but if you’d want to I’d love for you to get into charles head and thoughts a bit. It’s hard to explain what I mean because I’m being vague bc I’m embarrassed enough typing this as is lmfao but I hope you kinda get what I mean here? How you were talking about charles headspace in the other ask and everything I just got very Inchrested

I just love this verse and the way you write and maybe I die everytime I see another blog post of yours about some smutty shit! Maybe!

- 🦢 (I’ll make myself the swan emoji anon bc why the fuck not. Hi it’s me I sent the asks like max speaking Italian for maybe one line perfectly and made the suggestion about the ‘monza fic having the hotel tifosi chanting. Idk I just wanted to lyk it was me ahahshsjjs)

Okay hi, hello, I'm here with my thoughts now and absolutely YES, prepare for an essay:

Like idk, I've been meaning and trying to get into Charles' head a bit more since forever, but it is just quite hard nailing him down, he's just a very complex character nowadays with that duality between his 'dom persona' I guess and then absolute golden retriever, head over heels, bend over backwards, and jump when Max says jump sweetheart he is outside of that headspace

It's just there's just so many things from Charles' perspective to think of, you know, specifically talking about sex scenes now:

Like, okay, first of all, he's just a man, Max barely needs to take off his shirt. Like he's absolutely insatiable, he goes insane for a glimpse of Max's stomach, the only time he won't even try to start anything in the shower is if he got an orgasm five minutes ago, so obviously there's the aspect that he just thinks Max is fucking hot, just looking at Max does it for him, and also men are men, it feels good getting their dicks wet I guess

But then there's also obviously the thing that we don't talk about enough in fandom and that's that doms like being dominant just as much as subs like being submissive

And you know it's hard to nail it down and elucidate it, because we don't have enough examples for it, because (and this is also totally fine of course) fandom is just usually very focused on the perspective of more submissive people for probably many reasons which we won't get into rn, but the point is like you have to make this shit up as you go, there's not a script and an easy how-to like there is for writing submissive perspectives because we've all read thousands of those of course

Because like obviously Max technically has as much if not more control over the situation as Charles does with safewords and all, but Charles obviously LIKES being or feeling in control

There's kind of this underlying societal belief that we often get where it's just perceived as inherently bad when someone wants or likes to be in control or in a position of power, which is why I feel we hear the dom perspective waaay less than the sub one, because ironically, the doms are too shy to speak up I guess lol

But you know Charles obviously likes that he can tell Max what to do and he does it, he likes how Max, just as a person, is quite dominant in the way he behaves, he's not a follower, when someone says sit down Max asks why, and he's no different with Charles when they're just them and there's no dom/subness going on, but he likes how when they're in that space and Charles says sit down Max sits the fuck down

And then I think the thing I always emphasized most is how Charles just gets off on seeing Max feel good, like he gets off on making Max feel so good he loses all function, and that comes back to Charles having just as much of a praise kink as Max, but he doesn't need Max to tell him he's doing good, he needs to see it

And then it's just how do I fit all this in and consolidate it with the way that of course, Charles is far from quiet or reserved during sex, he won't shut up actually, but there's these times when, from Max's perspective, you have no idea what's going on in his head, because he has this talent for just turning his face blank

And don't think I as the author somehow know any more than you do when it comes to Max's perspective like guys idk either, I was just there

But yes, I do hope to elaborate on it a bit more in the future🥰❤️❤️❤️

[bonesandpoemsandflowers]

hey!!!!! i found this account recently and your info dumps and rants about poto are so based!!!! (coming from a high school student who loves gothic literature too).

what do you think about phantom of the opera attempting to defy tropes and cliches of the romantic era? considering that when gaston leroux wrote it when the era was coming to an end i’d like to think he said fuck it. and crafted poto to be a mockery of those romantic stereotypes ESPECIALLY with christine’s complexity and many facets …. what do you think? could be a really interesting thing to explore!! i am getting wayyy too deep

Lord, I'm not sure if I should be pleased or concerned that a high school student is describing my opinions as based at my age, but thanks. I had a high school PotO phase (naturally) and I've often reflected on how annoyed I would be if I had to face the current Discourse(tm) at that age. And also imo (naturally) there is no "too deep."

I do think that there's a lot to the idea that PotO is very much of its time. That is--it's so definitely post Romantic.

I wrote this in two separate sessions so I probably repeat myself, but:

have an essay, anon!

I don't think it's a mockery of the tropes as much as it is putting a bunch of the tropes in a blender. At the end of an era you have all these very familiar tropes to work with, so you can get weird about it. The audience already basically knows what to expect, so they're on familiar ground. Then you can fuck with them a little to make it your own.

It's like anything else going through phases: you get some critically claimed zombie shit (Romero's work or the walking dead first season) and then as time goes on people iterate and stunt on the genre so you get increasingly weird premises (what if zombies but mushrooms?) (what if zombie but stalker?) of varying degrees of seriousness and quality.

I'm not familiar enough with Gaston Leroux's other work, but I've read at least two scholarly pieces claiming that Erik is not just a mash up of established characters, but of mash up of Gaston's Leroux's own characters from other novels, specifically. So that's why some of his skillsets make no sense paired together: it's just a bunch of guys in there, wearing a trench coat full evening dress. And as a writer, I totally get this urge. "This guy was cool in this book, why not put him in this other book? Also he has an entirely new profession now. He went to trade school in the meantime or some shit."

Christine, though! This is trickier for me and shows my hand. I don't think I can as confidentially and easily toss off opinions about female characters in the Romantic and post Romantic eras. I'm going to reason through this as we go along. I have no idea what my conclusion is going to be because I have to check some dates first. I will give you my personal final answer for why Christine is as she is at the end, regardless.

So on one hand you have Frankenstein's Elizabeth in 1818, who, as far as I know, nobody is writing think pieces about. She's there, she's pretty and soft and good. She inspires Victor to think nice boy thoughts. Unless you know that first draft Victor was more explicitly modeled on Percy Shelley, you'd never know that first draft Elizabeth was based on Mary Shelley, because Elizabeth is almost a non-entity, while Mary Shelley was cool as fuck. Elizabeth is mostly there to be fridged--which I'm not necessarily against, because death and the maiden and blah blah blah and pretty dead girls is a horror genre motif specifically because people find it so tragic and moving. But also, like. Nobody's out here going, wow! Elizabeth! What a compelling female character! and if I did hear anybody say that, I would press x to doubt. Frankenstein is one of my favorite works of literature and I couldn't even remember Elizabeth's name for a solid three minutes.

But then, in 1847, you have Jane Eyre. And I don't know about you, anon, but I love Jane Eyre, and I love Jane. I was absolutely sitting there in AP Lit going "omg I'm such a Jane" and lusting over middle aged men. I think it's funny and great that it's taught in schools for that reason--Jane is basically your age when you read it! She's so relatable! She's whip smart and she's proud and she's struggling! What teenage girl isn't full of anguish and pride and internal screaming! People do write think pieces about Jane, as they should. And then, in 1897, you have Dracula. Which means you have Mina. And is anyone on earth arguing that Mina ISN'T great? She is also pure and good and blah blah--all the examples on this list are good girls and we'll get to that in a second--but she is, like Jane, very smart. She's using the cutting edge technology of her time! She's brave and clever and willing to fight against fucking Dracula. Mina rules. When I first read your ask, my first instinct here was to be dismissive of the idea that Christine is the result of rebellion against her era, because I specifically thought: well she's basically a Mina, isn't she? So not innovative at all. BUT. I think my first instinct was wrong, actually. Or at least: taking a lot for granted. Looking at the dates for the gothic classics I rattled off the top of my head--there's a progression there, isn't there? They're all Good Girls but the good girl gets smarter and more competent as time goes on. And Mina is cool but still part of the ensemble. Christine often gets co-billing with Erik or she's outright considered the main character. She gets a much bigger piece of the story pie.

And I think Christine is more emotionally nuanced than anyone else on this list. She's deftly navigating class differences (calling Raoul on his shit) (Mina never does that I recall--Jane does but that is central to her circumstances) and she's well aware of Erik's horror (you know, his everything) but book Christine is more emotionally savvy than most modern day readers in that she understands that Erik is to a great degree a product of his environment. I hate that people these days view Erik as a bad boyfriend metaphor. He's not. He is, as the book tells us over and over, a monster. And also…very human. And the way those things collide and what that means is the point of the book, and maybe the ending is too tidy but that the book has a happy ending is imo almost solely Christine's doing. Sure, the dagora and Raoul are doing stuff. But they might as well be mice in a fairy tale giving the dispossessed princess (and main character) advice on how to sort wheat in the moonlight or whatever. The person directly confronting the monster is Christine. And the person that grants him grace and thereby humanizes him…is Christine. Only Christine has this alchemical power in the novel. The dagora's been humanizing Erik for DECADES of in story time and apparently this hasn't accomplished shit. Furthermore, Christine's power here isn't something that Erik grants her because she doesn't humanize him with the Power of Music or whatever. It's her parsing things out and making choices. Christine's empathy is not a gift that Erik gives her; she has it from the start.

But it's a little tricky, right. It's too tidy. I'm letting it be tidy for now but as you know--I assume if you've been floating through my poorly tagged rants--I view PotO pretty exclusively through a monsterfucking lens and Christine might be the hero, but we, the audience, are supposed to identify with Erik and all that is monstrous in ourselves.

(have a tag mini essay about it here.)

but whatever! that's not the question!

The question being, as I understand it: is Christine's characterization in particular a reaction against the artistic context of Leroux's time?

and…yes and no?

Like if we look through our cherry-picked examples, there is a CLEAR progression in female character work. But these are stand outs and not necessarily representative. They are classics for a reason. And I suspect we can't forget genre here. Enduring gothic horror is pretty much always transgressive in some way. So a progression that we can track in THIS genre doesn't necessarily mean society or art on the whole was on the same track, let alone at the same pace. I would defer to the kind of weirdo that has more expertise than me here--the kind of person who deliberately reads forgotten or unclaimed period literature. Someone who really gets the artistic context of the time, not just the classics.

How much of that is Gaston Leroux on purpose, though, right? That’s more of what you mean, I think, and that’s what I should be answering. If I rephrase it to: do I think Christine is written that way on purpose? ABSOLUTELY, yes.

HOWEVER

I have a much simpler reason I think Gaston Leroux wrote a great female protag in 1909. And that is: Gaston Leroux fucks. As in, very literally went through a messy lady's man, spend his inheritance in brothels phase.

You might think I mean that in a bad way, but no. The right kind of personality doing this is someone who meets to and talks to a bunch of women. And if it's a man who happens to view women as people--and also views sex workers as human--a dude can come out of this phase really well rounded. Or: not every guy who goes to the strip club is a loser or a misogynist.

You are too young to remember this, anon, but [crone voice] time was, people thought Joss Whedon was a feminist writer. I got myself kicked out of TWO different feminist clubs in undergrad because everybody loved Buffy the Vampire Slayer and I was an asshole who said "Buffy the Vampire Slayer is shit." Or rather, it's fine, it's fun, but I don't view it as a feminist work and to me, Whedon was so obviously always a creep and none of his female characters ever resonated. (in all fairness to both undergrad clubs: I was an asshole. And I was very young, and I was frustrated by not having the language for what I meant yet. But my issues with Whedon could fill many other posts.)

There is a type of male writer that I describe as: this man has never talked to a woman in his goddamn life.

And that's not literally true; it's impossible for it to be literally true.

But I think it is basically true in that you have men who never talk to women unless they're trying to fuck them and even then only ever talk to them as vending machines they expect to spit out a fuck token if they hit the right word count. And it shows in their work! it shows! people are always surprised when a Louis CK type ends up with sexual misconduct accusations. people seem to think only Chads are predators. no! no no no no. The Neil Gaiman shit coming out recently, do you know who was surprised? NOT ME.

Which isn't to say you can't trust nerds ever. Nor am I saying that every man who blows his hereditament on hookers and blow is gonna be the kind of guy who actually has conversations with women.

What am I saying here? I am saying that I think Gaston Leroux was probably a pretty cool dude. He wrote Erik incredibly sexy despite literally everything and he wrote Christine brave and resourceful and willing to talk back to her pretty boy nobility love interest. That dude hung out with women. I am SURE of it. I do not think anyone could write a character as enduring as Erik, as bizarrely romantically and sexually appealing as Erik, without understanding what (some) women want, what (some) women like.

but here's something you didn't ask about--I called all these female characters good girls, right? And interestingly, arguably, both Mina and Christine have bad girl counterparts. Or Lucy isn't exactly a bad girl--until she's a vampire--but her three proposals a day are presented in contrast to Mina's already settled engagement. And Christine's story opens with Sorelli!

(I fucking love Sorelli)

Sorelli, who is Phillipe's mistress and carries a knife everywhere! GOD I LOVE HER. where was I.

anyway, good girls.

The ingénue.

I read The Phantom of the Opera for the first time when I was nine years old. I had to use my mom's paperback merriam webster dictionary to look up the word ingénue. I don't remember what I read but I remember very distinctly thinking: ah. not me, then.

which is an INSANE thought to have as a 9 year old!

but 9 year old me was right. by that point my family had lived in not one but several war zones and we had specifically been on a cartel hit list. I had seen people jump off a suicide bridge by our apartment.

The adults in my life, possibly because they were stressed out from living in a war zone, were all deeply committed to fucked up behaviors so that young me lived in a particularly gory telenovela. I knew what bombs sounded like and what gunshots sounded like and what bodies in the street looked like.

I had a shit and deeply weird childhood for reasons beyond all that, too, but the point is that I'm always arguing about this story with people from a certain kind of comfortable background that I just don't have. Didn't have, even at the time. I do not remember childhood as an idyllic time, as Bill Watterson once said.

so if you read PotO and you're not Christine

and you're not Raoul, because Raoul is a good girl except he's a boy and also rich and actual nobility, so therefore even less relatable

then who are you?

if you're weird and haunted and already feel different and other than your peers (and your peers can tell that there is, in fact, something wrong with you) (even if it's not your fault) and you read this book, who are you?

You're Erik. as stupid as that might sound. Even if you are, say, cute and small and nine years old.

and then, once I was older, once I re-read it and watched the 2005 movie and generally rediscovered the story post puberty, then I was like: oh my god he's HOT he's been hot this WHOLE TIME.

my initial reaction, even as a child, was sympathy and empathy and it is fuckin wild to me, my dude, that people keep reading this story in this day and age and they instantly align themselves against Erik because Erik is so immediately other. He immediately becomes a cipher for things they find monstrous. I genuinely feel there is some Jungian shadow shit happening here but it also makes me feel terribly cynical and un-ingénue all over again that people think Erik is about male entitlement or toxic relationships. It's always ERIK: SYMBOL OF BAD BOYFRIEND. and like, honestly? honestly? drives me fucking insane for reasons beyond the obvious, too. HOW COMFORTABLE ARE YOU IF YOUR ONLY CONTEXT FOR MONSTER IS TOXIC ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIP?

not that, say, DV won't fucking kill you. but that's not even what most of the anti Erik crowd means. my point is merely that there are many more types of trauma, and many more types of monsters.

[also yeah planning to blow up an opera house is straight up evil, though. no excuses for mass murder events.]

But back to Erik—not that you even asked about Erik—I truly believe that there is a huge chunk of the audience with the media literacy of tin can of beans. I was haunting the PotO subreddit for a while and the takes are rancid. I really think a certain kind of reader—usually a woman—reads that Erik is ugly and Raoul is pretty and rich and noble, and that is somehow all they get from the work.

And that Erik—who is ugly—might feel normal human drives like lust or the desire to be loved is disgusting to these people. And they act like it. "This is a story about male entitlement!" No. It’s a story about human yearning. That some people react to yearning from an imperfect source with such visceral disgust is, you know, the entire point of the fucking book.

I preach to the choir, of course. It is on purpose. I am tired of arguing, of the expectation of being pious and apologetic before enjoying the work.

I logged out of reddit mostly to stop going to r/Box5. “And look how much healthier and hotter you’ve gotten in the past few months!” a friend said to me recently, which is a) kind of cringe and pathetic but also b) objectively true.

have you experienced love never dies yet so we can talk about how it's bad? no? SAVE YOURSELF, CHILD. RUN! RUN AWAY NOW BEFORE IT CATCHES YOU.

(LND is bad but compelling all the same. it's a disease.)

anyway, hope some of that is enlightening, thank you for stopping by and saying hi, and enjoy your future phantom adventures.

[lord-aldhelm]

Writing Interview Tag Game!

Thank you for the tag @bagheerita! This one has taken me a while to do since it is so long. As with the original post I have pasted the template below the "read more" cut so you can copy and paste if you want to do this.

About Me:

When did you start writing? Specifically for The Last Kingdom: it was sometime late in 2022, probably October or November. My original drafts kept getting over-written due to some stupid bug in Word which, when the auto-save was triggered, it would force me to save as a new document. So I have no idea exactly when, unfortunately. Besides this, I used to write a bit when I was a teenager, for my OC, but I never got further than a few chapters.

Are there different genres or themes you enjoy reading other than the ones you write? For fanfics: I mostly read TLK fanfics at the moment, and I suppose that falls under historical fiction/period drama. For genres, I like happy endings with some angst and mutual pining to make it interesting. For books: I am a fantasy nerd for sure.

Is there an author you want to emulate, or are compared to often? For fanfics I cannot think of one specifically, although reading fanfics has influenced the way I write. I have learned to incorporate more sensory descriptions in my writing, and trying to use more metaphors and poetic descriptions rather than the literal way of writing I normally do. For authors, I love JRR Tolkien, Tad Williams, and GRR Martin, so I suppose they influence me as well.

Can you tell me a bit about your writing space? I write on my laptop in my home office, using Microsoft Word.

What’s your most effective way to muster up a muse? Oh I cannot muster up a muse. They sneak up on me and invade my fantasies, highjacking my thoughts and holding me hostage until I write them down. lol! Although sometimes I might be inspired to write something based on a deranged convo with one of my friends, so there is that! Also, having people give me feedback on my writing definitely motivates me to write more.

Did the place(s) you grew up in influence the people and/or places you write about? Not particularly. I grew up in a lower middle class family in the suburbs, not really very inspirational. I do however have a very vivid and overactive imagination.

Are there any reoccurring themes in your writing? If so, do they surprise you? I have not written very much so I cannot say for sure. I only have one long fic and a few smaller fics, and they all center around the same character. I do like to take a deep dive into character development and introspection though. I really love thinking about what motivates the characters, and their inner thoughts.

Characters

Would you please tell me about your current favorite character? Aldhelm... um... I have literally written whole entire essays about him so I won't go into detail here lmao!

Which of your characters would you be friends with in real life? Aldhelm for sure. He would be my bestie. And more...

Which characters would you dislike the most of you met them? Probably Aethelred.. he is such a whiny brat.

Tell me about the process of coming up with your characters? I am assuming this applies to OC's... which I have a few of in my stories! The first is Beohtric, which is Aldhelm's brother. Aldhelm needed a family and a backstory and I felt, most importantly, he needed an advocate, so I created Beohtric to be that person. Someone who supported Aldhelm and gave him some kind of center for his life. I have other OC's which are more kind of side characters created for a purpose, like Wulfstan in the fic about how Aldhelm became captain of the guard. Then there are other characters which are deceased at the time of writing, but I still came up with personalities and backstories for them because they were relevant to the plot. There is another major OC for a story I am working on, who is based on a few characters from other series/movies, as well as being a sort of alter-ego.

Do you notice any reoccurring themes/traits in your characters? Not particularly for my OC's, no? I mean I try to make them more three dimensional, and realistic. Not purely evil or not purely good. Having flaws as well as good characteristics.

How do you picture your characters? In my head? Sometimes I can form an image of them using an existing person as a template (character reference I think this is called?) But most of the time they are kind of generic.

My Writing:

What’s your reason for writing? The reason for writing my fanfics is because of my deep love for Aldhelm and The Last Kingdom, and the overwhelming urge to tell my own story about him. It started out as a series of daydreams that kind of spilled out into a Word document and then it all went downhill from there lol!

Is there any specific comment or type of comment from readers that you find particularly motivating? Anything! Any comments are welcome, even the generic "I love your fic!" types. Although I really love the people that take the time to go into detail about a particular scene or chapter and tell me what exactly they loved about it. That really makes my day!

How do you want to be thought about by your readers? That I am passionate about the characters in the stories that I write.

What do you feel is your greatest strength as a writer? I suppose character development.

Have you been told is your greatest strength as a writer is by others? Writing a story that is easy to read, has good sensory descriptions, and a compelling storyline.

How do you feel about your own writing? I think it could be better, but I am definitely seeing improvements since I first started almost two years ago.

If you were the last person on earth, would you still write? Yeah I would. Because I write for myself. I love seeing my stories work themselves out on the page.

When you write, are you influenced by what others might enjoy reading, do you write purely for yourself, or is it a mix of both? A little of both? I mostly write for myself, but I also consider if someone wants to read it. I try to make it enjoyable and interesting.

No pressure tags: @thelettersfromnoone @holy3cake @paula-in-dreamland @errruvande

@sihtricfedaraaahvicius @gemini-mama @foxyanon @grinningkatz @thenameswinter99

@alexagirlie @synintheraven @freddie-foxs @st-eve-barnes and whoever else wants to participate!

This took me FOREVER to do so I am not expecting that any of you will do this soon.

BLANK TEMPLATE:

About me

When did you start writing?

Are there different genres or themes you enjoy reading other than the ones you write?

Is there an author you want to emulate, or are compared to often?

Can you tell me a bit about your writing space?

What’s your most effective way to muster up a muse?

Did the place(s) you grew up in influence the people and/or places you write about?

Are there any reoccurring themes in your writing? If so, do they surprise you?

Characters

Would you please tell me about your current favorite character?

Which of your characters would you be friends with in real life?

Which characters would you dislike the most of you met them?

Tell me about the process of coming up with your characters?

Do you notice any reoccurring themes/traits in your characters?

How do you picture your characters?

My writing

What’s your reason for writing?

Is there any specific comment or type of comment from readers that you find particularly motivating?

How do you want to be thought about by your readers?

What do you feel is your greatest strength as a writer?

Have you been told is your greatest strength as a writer is by others?

How do you feel about your own writing?

If you were the last person on earth, would you still write?

When you write, are you influenced by what others might enjoy reading, do you write purely for yourself, or is it a mix of both?

[possiblylando]

I kinda wanna write about sexuality in chainsaw man and how it plays into the stories and characters without ever being "explicit" about any given characters sexuality but it would also probably mean rereading all of csm which I do not want to do right now ! Instead heres a tierlist and brief thoughts and we can see how much of this changes by the time I get around to the full thing.

-Anyone showing interest in Makima (outside of denji) won't be counted towards their sexuality because pretty much all of them were being controlled by her to find her sexually attractive. -Bi Aki is totally fair, however he never seems to show interest in women outside of Makima. Despite Himeno's active romantic advances he never take her up on it. Angel is his only somewhat romantic relationship. -Pochita is the one who conjured up that image of Angel in lingerie. no further comment. -I've seen pretty decent arguments for Denji's misandry being used to cover up homoerotic feelings + the fact beam touching him makes him very uncomfortable most of the time. It might be explored, It might not be. Who knows. -I could probably write an entire fucking essay on whatever the fuck is wrong with Makima because there is way too much to unpack there. Does her manipulation of others into them feeling love for her stem from lust or just lack of emotional closeness? It's probably the latter but with the way she has them act it could be the former aswell. It could be that she can't even comprehend true platonic love due to having been raised without it and so her only way to see love is sexual (would be a near possible parallel to denji). It's a fucking lot I'm not touching with a ten foot poll cause this is supposed to be short. -Power and the Doll Devil are definitively have sexualities but I'm not sure what they are. lmk if you have thoughts (supporting evidence would be nice but vibes are fine tbh)