#i do even have issues with some aspects of the writing itself at times

[rinzi]

It's been bothering me for a few days now, so:

I saw someone's list of reasons aftg is badly written, and most of them were entirely unrelated to the writing. It was largely a list of morality complaints and matters of taste with very few actual notes on the writing itself.

Something can be amoral and well written. Something can be highly moral and poorly written. These two traits have no correlation to each other whatsoever.

I fully understand if the quality of moral expression in a work makes someone unable to enjoy reading it, but that is not the same thing as bad writing.

I'm not going to pretend the series is perfect, but there is a reason it has captured so many hearts. That reason is in the writing right there alongside the issues. You'd think with someone as complex and wonderful and deeply flawed as Andrew being the most popular character, this fandom in particular would know to appreciate something for its flaws as much as its strengths

[copperbadge]

I'm getting depressingly good at identifying the formula for Pop Academic Books About ADHD.

Regardless of their philosophy it pretty much goes like this:

1. Emotionally sensitive essay about the struggle of ADHD and the author's personal experience with it as both a person with ADHD and a healthcare professional.

2. Either during or directly following this, a lightly explicated catalogue of symptoms, illustrated by anecdotes from patient case studies. Optional: frequent, heavy use of metaphor to explain ADHD-driven behavior.

3. Several chapters follow, each dedicated to a symptom; these have a mini-formula of their own. They open with a patient case study, discuss the highly relatable aspects of the specific symptom or behavior, then offer some lightweight examples of a treatment for the symptom, usually accompanied by follow up results from the earlier case studies.

4. Somewhere around halfway-to-two-thirds through the book, the author introduces the more in-depth explication of the treatment system (often their own homebrew) they are advocating. These are generally both personally-driven (as opposed to suggested cultural changes, which makes sense given these books' target audience, more on this later) and composed of an elaborate system of either behavior alteration or mental reframing. Whether this system is actually implementable by the average reader varies wildly.

5. A brief optional section on how to make use of ADHD as a tool (usually referring to ADHD or some of its symptoms as a superpower at least once). Sometimes this section restates the importance of using the systems from part 4 to harness that superpower. Frequently, if present, it feels like an afterthought.

6. Summation and list of further resources, often including other books which follow this formula.

I know I'm being a little sarcastic, but realistically there's nothing inherently wrong about the formula, like in itself it's not a red flag. It's just hilariously recognizable once you've noticed it.

It makes sense that these books advocate for the Reader With ADHD undertaking personal responsibility for their treatment, since these are in the tradition of self-help publishing. They're aimed at people who are already interested in doing their own research on their disability and possible ways to handle it. It's not really fair to ask them to be policy manuals, but I do find it interesting that even books which advocate stuff like volunteering (for whatever reason, usually to do with socialization issues and isolation, often DBT-adjacent) never suggest disability activism either generally or with an ADHD-specific bent.

None of these books suggest that perhaps life with ADHD could be made easier with increased accommodations or ease of medication access, and that it might be in a person's best interest to engage in political advocacy surrounding these and other disability-related issues. Or that activism related to ADHD might help to give someone with ADHD a stronger sense of ownership of their unique neurology. Or that if you have ADHD the idea of activism or even medical self-advocacy is crushingly stressful, and ways that stress might be dealt with.

It does make me want to write one of my own. "The Deviant Chaos Guide To Being A Miscreant With ADHD". Includes chapters on how to get an actual accurate assessment, tips for managing a prescription for a controlled substance, medical and psychiatric self-advocacy for people who are conditioned against confrontation, When To Lie About Being Neurodivergent, policy suggestions for ADHD-related legislation, tips for activism while executively dysfunked, and to close the book a biting satire of the pop media idea of self-care. ("Feeling sad? Make yourself a nice pot of chicken soup from scratch and you'll feel better in no time. Stay tuned after this rambling personal essay for the most mediocre chicken soup recipe you've ever seen!" "Have you considered planning and executing an overly elaborate criminal heist as a way to meet people and stay busy?")

Every case study or personal anecdote in the book will have a different name and demographics attached but will also make it obvious that they are all really just me, in the prose equivalent of a cheap wig, writing about my life. "Kelly, age seven, says she struggles to stay organized using the systems neurotypical children might find easy. I had to design my own accounting spreadsheet in order to make sure I always have enough in checking to cover the mortgage, she told me, fidgeting with the pop socket on her smartphone."

I feel a little bad making fun, because these books are often the best resource people can get (in itself concerning). It's like how despite my dislike of AA, I don't dunk on it in public because I don't want to offer people an excuse not to seek help. It feels like punching down to criticize these books, even though it's a swing at an industry that is mainly, it seems, here to profit from me. But one does get tired of skimming the hype for the real content only to find the real content isn't that useful either.

Les (not his real name) was diagnosed at the age of 236. Charming, well-read, and wealthy, he still spent much of his afterlife feeling deeply inadequate about his perceived shortcomings. "Vampire culture doesn't really acknowledge ADHD as a condition," he says. "My sire wouldn't understand, even though he probably has it as well. You should see the number of coffins containing the soil of his homeland that he's left lying forgotten all over Europe." A late diagnosis validated his feelings of difference, but on its own can't help when he hyperfocuses on seducing mortals who cross his path and forgets to get home before sunrise. "I have stock in sunburn gel companies," he jokes.

[prodigal-explorer]

how to write children's personalities

(this is part of my series, how to write children in fanfiction! feel free to check it out if you want more info like this!)

this is the main aspect of writing children that i see people mess up so often, especially in the fandoms i'm in (sanders sides and undertale). children are not adorable little noodles with no brains and no concept besides being cute and silly and crying. children are beings that are just as complex as adults, and they deserve personalities to match. this will make them way more interesting to read about! let's get started!

since there are so many aspects to personality to talk about and i don't want to sit here typing for ten years, we're going to do this guide a little differently. i'm going to divide these issues into archetypes, write a short description, and then make a list of do's and don't's for each one!

archetype one: the cute little baby

okay. babies are cute. we all know this, and i'm not saying it's a bad thing to make your babies cute. a lot of people love reading about moments with adorable little babies. but here are some ways to step this kind of thing up, and some things to avoid if you want to improve upon writing this archetype.

do's:

give the child character another archetype besides this one. though "cute" is the foundation for a lot of child characters, it's not a personality. and if a character is vital to your story, then it needs a personality. that's just a rule. you will read more about other archetypes further along in this post!

make the moments symbolic. though it doesn't seem like it from an outsider's perspective, basically everything a baby does is for a reason, and every action a baby makes can say something about their personality. if you want this baby's personality to be energetic and curious, have them crawl around and explore things, and laugh a lot, and babble. if you want this baby to be more sullen and shy, have them cry quietly instead of wailing, or have them squirm when being held by new people.

make the actions of the baby's guardians affect the mannerisms of the baby. babies act differently depending on how the people taking care of them act and react. for instance, if the baby's guardians are very busy people, then maybe have the baby cry very loudly whenever they want something, since they know that it's the only way to get the attention of their guardians. stuff like that can add depth to a character and to a general story.

don't's:

decide that the baby is cute and call it a day. sweet little babies are cool and all, but they get very boring to read about after a while. this can barely even be considered an archetype because of how bland it is when it's by itself.

keep this archetype around for too long. as babies turn into toddlers and then children, they don't act even remotely the same way. it's strange and off-putting to read about a seven year old acting like a two-year old, unless it's a very clear character choice that is a result of explicit actions and events.

make the baby know that it's cute. realistically, children don't understand the concept of cuteness until they're around toddler age. if then, you want to make the kid be like "i get what i want when i'm cute, so i'll act cute!", then sure, that's hilarious. but when they're two months old, they're not batting their eyelashes because that's their personality. they're batting their eyelashes because they got something in their eye. the main thing that makes a baby cute is that they don't know they're cute. they're just figuring out how to do ordinary things.

make everything a cute moment. while babies are awesome, raising them isn't always sunshine and rainbows. make the baby do something wildly chaotic, because babies do wildly chaotic things all the time. not only does this make things more realistic, but it makes things very interesting!

archetype two: the shy kid

as a former shy kid, i know good and well that these types of children exist, and they are very real and valid. however, there are certain ways i've seen them written that are just terrible because once again, this archetype cannot be considered a full personality on its own. let's get into the do's and don't's.

do's:

make their shyness a deliberate choice. kids aren't usually naturally shy. kids are usually more curious than cautious. is there a reason why the kid is shy? there doesn't have to be a reason why the kid is shy, but there could be a reason why the child is NOT outgoing/curious. try and give something like this some deliberate cause, instead of just making them shy so they can seem more precious and infantilized.

make their shyness manifest in diverse ways. not all shy kids cling to their guardian's leg and sit alone during recess. there are different ways to be shy. you can be aggressively shy, or fearfully shy, or shy due to general unwillingness to change.

make their shyness have realistic consequences. someone who's shy is probably not going to have many friends, if any. not all shy kids magically meet an extrovert who adopts them. someone who's shy probably has underdeveloped social skills, which can lead to them being less emotionally intelligent down the line. this makes the shy kid archetype a lot more three-dimensional than just a wet noodle of fear.

don't's:

infantilize shyness or treat it like it makes the kid some sweet, precious angel. not only is this very uncomfortable for shy people to read, but it's generally unrealistic. shyness doesn't affect how good or bad somebody is - it's a neutral trait.

use shyness as a tool to make characters seem younger. shyness does not indicate age. fear manifests in many different ways, and shyness is not the only way.

rely on cliches. not all shy people have the same journey, and the idea that a shy person becoming more outgoing is the "goal" is not only a bit offensive, but it's very cliche. shyness is not always an obstacle to be overcome.

archetype three: the happy-go-lucky kid

oftentimes, the reason why children characters are written into stories in the first place is to give a little bit of lightheartedness and innocence. to add a unique voice among all the cranky, stingy, burdened adults. but you have to be careful when writing this archetype. i personally really dislike this archetype as a whole, but i'm going to put personal feelings towards it aside because honestly, there's no valid reason to dislike it besides opinion.

do's:

give the kid a trademark. maybe this kid makes a lot of little jokes, or maybe they always see the best in a situation. give the kid one thing that makes them happy-go-lucky instead of just giving them everything because nobody is endlessly happy all the time in every way.

go deeper. while happiness is very often genuine, sometimes, it's a mask that hides something else. this can be an interesting way to sort of spice up your happy-go-lucky kid character. maybe the kid is hiding a big secret behind all those jokes.

don't's:

make the character always happy. while children tend to have simpler thoughts, they don't have simpler minds. this child needs to have thoughts, real, genuine thoughts that aren't just happy things.

see happy-go-lucky as a trait that is exclusive to children. comparing happiness to childhood and viewing them as the only places where the other can exist is just wrong, and it's kind of depressing. maybe give happy-go-lucky kid a happy-go-lucky adult to exchange jokes with!

---

those are the archetypes that i see a lot. but now, i'm going to suggest a few child character archetypes that i LOVE that i don't see enough in fics! feel free to use any of these that you like. alter them, combine them! these are, in my opinion, some of the most fun child character personalities!

the spoiled brat: "i want this, and that, and that, and- why aren't you giving it to me?? if you don't give me what i want, i'll tell on you!". spoiled brats are so fun to read and write about, especially when they have absolutely no reason to be spoiled given the current situation (think riches to rags). they've got everything, humor, angst, and best of all, lots of pockets for personality. think about why the child is spoiled. were they enabled by their guardians? did they grow up rich, with access to everything they wanted? think about whether you want the child to stay spoiled. does something change? do they learn how to improve their materialistic and selfish tendencies? there are so many opportunities to play with the personality of this child!

the know-it-all kid: while i do see a lot of know-it-all kids in media, oftentimes, they don't actually have personality besides bossiness and intelligence. i love know-it-all kids who have depth to them. kids who are constantly spouting information because of their sheer love to learn. kids who have one specific thing that they know everything about, so they never stop talking about it. kids who tell people what to do and act like they know best because they don't have a lot of control over anything at home, so they grasp at whatever control they can find elsewhere. i think this archetype could open up a lot of ideas for personality further down the line. it also has a lot of variety with humor and angst, and general depth.

the serious child: this is an archetype that i cannot get enough of. i love a child that doesn't think they're an adult, per se, and still enjoys kid things, but just has such a calm and regal air about them that isn't learned. it's just natural. think of the kid that doesn't really get excited about things conventionally, but you can tell they're happy by their faint smile. the kid that seems to live in slow motion, and doesn't mind this fact at all. the kid that sits alone at recess just because other kids scare the birds away, and they want to see how a bird acts when it doesn't think its being watched. i love kids who have poignant thoughts, because their thoughts are so creative and different from adult thoughts.

the adult-ified child: now this is another archetype i can't get enough of, but it's for a different reason. this child, on the other hand, does think that they're an adult for one reason or another. maybe their guardians forced them to grow up too quickly. maybe they just wanted to grow up quickly by themselves. but this child has thoughts that are too big for their little bodies. they explore things that aren't meant to be explored when their brains are still so small. they do everything too quickly, they stumble through life as if a clock is ticking somewhere. to me, they're just haunting to read about. it feels wrong and dangerous to just watch them do things that hurt them because they don't know any better, but they're on a page. nobody can stop them. it's just so tragic, i'm obsessed.

the prodigal child: this archetype isn't really as deep or detailed as the others, but i do appreciate it. this archetype is for a child who knew who they wanted to be from an early age. a child who wanders into a ballet class and finds out they're better than the ten year olds by the time they're five. this archetype often pairs really well with the know-it-all kid or the adult-ified child because usually, children don't experience what it's like to be the best at something until they're a lot older. this is just a really cool archetype when you aren't quite sure what to do with that main character's little sister.

the chaotic child: this archetype is so much fun to read and write, to be honest. this is a child that just does as they please, whether it's out of curiosity or for pure enjoyment. think of the crazy stories that your guardians have about you or your siblings being absolutely insane. scribbling in a book and then demanding that the library publish their version. trying to ride the dog like a horse. cutting up clothes in an attempt to be a fashion designer. this one is just plain fun!

---

now, there are so many more archetypes out there, but those are just my spotlights and recommendations! i hope after reading this, you feel more equipt to write child characters that have real, engaging, interesting personalities!

[shepherds-of-haven]

Hello! You’ve talked before about having experience with professional writing/publishing, so you seem like a good person to ask. I’ve seen authors say that they avoid reading/interacting with fanfiction of their work due to “possible legal issues,” but I’m not actually sure what law they’re referring to. Is this something that you’re familiar with, or advice you’ve come across before? Why would fanfiction be an issue if something like fanart isn’t? Thank you in advance if you have the time to answer!

Hi there, thanks for your question! This is actually something I've had a lot of interest in over the years, partly because I (at one point) was planning on going to law school to potentially become a copyright/intellectual property lawyer, and partially because I have some personal connections to things that happened in this arena (my agent was the agent of an affected author at some point in the past, my publisher or senior editors knew so-and-so), and also, I grew up reading fanfiction, so I've heard concerns on both sides of this issue.

To boil it down succinctly, there is no outright law that prevents authors from reading fanfiction of their own work. However, doing so can become messy in ways that many authors would rather avoid, and there is one famous example of where this went awry and scared authors off of reading fanworks of their own work.

In the US, all authors automatically gain copyright and intellectual ownership over their writing/original content, from the moment they put it into physical form (writing it or typing it). They don't have to do anything to register this right: it just automatically exists, and with it comes a few special rights.

Authors have the right to:

Reproduce or make copies of their work

Distribute copies of their work to the public, in whichever manner they choose (sell, rent, etc.)

Publicly display or perform the work (post, print, act, etc.)

Create derivative works from that work (sequels, adaptations, spin-offs)

License or sell any of these rights to others.

(It should be noted that copyright applies to specific expressions, not ideas. The specific details of your work, including the plot, characters, worldbuilding, text, and other unique aspects are protected. General ideas, tropes, themes, or concepts are not. A story about a magical school, a "chosen one" protagonist who discovers hidden powers as he gets older, or a bearded mentor who's killed at some point in the story are tropes that can't be copyrighted. However, a magical school with a specific personality-based house system, or a bespectacled dark-haired boy with a lightning-shaped scar, can. This isn't just a name thing, either, but covers features like personalities, unique characteristics, and character arcs. Hence "expression" versus "idea." Universal Studios even has a trademark on their specific expression of Frankenstein's monster (flat-top head, bolts in his neck, lumbering walk) - but that's only because the original copyright on Frankenstein itself has lapsed.)

Anyway, so authors have rights over their intellectual property. Pretty simple, right? Except, under this field of law, that means other people--including people who make fanworks--don't have the technical rights to this intellectual property. (They definitely don't have the right to make money off of it, unless they receive permission.) Because fanworks like fanfiction use protected elements like characters, worlds, and terms, they're derivative works, which technically only the author of the work has the right to create.

(Since I'm trying to keep my answer brief, you can read more about derivative works below the cut.) [1]

Many authors explicitly allow fan-made derivative works (aka fanfiction and fanart) of their fiction to be made anyway, with some obvious disclaimers (don't make money off of it, don't claim the original author wrote it, etc.). However, others are under the impression (or have been advised legally) that granting this permission could hurt them in the long run. They've been led to believe that if they don't "vigorously defend their own copyright," they will lose that copyright and all the rights that go with it (including say over how their work is used, where the profit goes, etc.). They believe they could lose in court if someone else plagiarizes them or steals their work and profits from it or uses their work in a way that they don't agree with (like depicting their popular character as homophobic); they will have no legal recourse, because they gave others permission to make derivative works of their story. I don't know how well-founded this fear is in a historical precedent sense, but I know it's rampant especially among older authors in the industry (for reasons I'll get into below), and I also know that legal battles do get really messy if it's not just "I said no, unequivocally, but you did it anyway." Granting permission in some cases (fanfiction) but not others (fanfiction that upsets you, or conflicts with your moral convictions, or hurts your product or its sales, or unfairly makes money off of your property) creates a really gray area in court, so some authors prefer just not to take chances and will blanket-ban derivative works of their stuff unequivocally.

(For a useful page on which authors explicitly encourage fanworks and which ones outright ban it, click here.)

Now, even for the authors who allow fan-made derivative works of their writing (which includes me!), there are many who are leery of actually reading it. Why? Long story short, this is referred to in the industry as the MZB incident.

I've heard different accounts of this story, but I'll boil it down to the bullet points that I know of:

In the 1980s, an author named Marion Zimmer Bradley (who is coincidentally (?) a horrid, awful criminal for other reasons) was a popular fantasy author who was extremely involved in her own fanfiction community. She actively encouraged fanfiction of her world and stories, and even edited a fanzine based off of this world, and was an overall enthusiastic and friendly collaborator and mentor to burgeoning fic writers, whom she invited to play in her setting as a sandbox. She was considered to be one of the biggest public champions of fanfiction at the time.

In one version of the story, a fan, Jean Lamb, sent one of her fanfics (published in a fanzine) to MZB. Some time later, the fan noticed that MZB was writing a new novel that had thematic and plot similarities to her own fanfic. The fan alleged that MZB had plagiarized her ideas, and fearing a potential legal battle, MZB stopped writing that book, developed writer's block, and never did work on that series ever again. This was a horrifying cautionary tale to all authors who witnessed it and essentially spelled the end of that fictional world (Darkover) for good.

In another version of the story, MZB received a copy of the fanzine from Jean Lamb, saw that Jean's story coincidentally focused on a character and time period that MZB herself was focusing on for her upcoming sequel, and she was stopped from continuing on the book by her publisher, who feared legal troubles. (This one is the one that makes the least sense to me, and I've personally heard it from others that this was not how things went down.)

In the last version of the story, MZB received a copy of the fanzine from Jean Lamb, really liked the ideas or interpretations she saw in it, and wanted to incorporate elements into the series' official canon, writing back to ask for permission to do this, like, "Hey, I really liked your take on so-and-so, can I put that in the new book with credit to you in the dedication and 500$?" She had apparently done this with other willing fans before. However, rather than the honored response she was expecting, Jean Lamb wrote back asking for more money and co-authorship on the cover, and MZB apparently got leery that if any similarities to the idea cropped up in her writing in the future, the whole thing would tailspin legally and she'd be accused of plagiarism. In short, the well had been tainted, and you can't just "forget" you saw a cool idea, and the fan knows you saw it, so if they get a whiff that the cool idea influenced you even in subconscious ways, they could be entitled to compensation. Or maybe just being "banned" from writing something in her own world because someone else claimed ownership to it soured MZB on the whole thing. Either way, she quit writing the series and banned all fanfiction of her work soon after.

The MZB was a big hullabaloo in both the professional author world and the fanfiction community at the time, and it's principally cited as the main reason why authors shouldn't read fanfiction of their own work. (You can read George R.R. Martin's summation of the story and why he doesn't allow fanfiction because of it below the cut.) There's a fear that if you accidentally get exposed to something--an interpretation, an idea, a take on your character or world--it becomes really unclear whose idea is whose, and the copyrights could overlap, and then you'll lose ownership over your own world, story, and characters. Even if you don't officially "incorporate" a fan's idea into the work like MZB allegedly wanted to, but instead come up with something on your own or were planning it all along, but it's known you also read fanfiction of your own work, there is no way of proving that you were already planning on doing the thing or were inspired by something totally different; a bad actor could claim you read their fanfic at some point and plagiarized it, so many authors choose to avoid the whole headache and protect themselves by just not reading fanfiction of their work at all, so as to not muddy the waters. [3]

I hope that all makes sense! This is already getting long, but I'll just wrap up by adding that I wrote all of this to answer your question--why some authors prefer not to read fanfiction of their own work--but I will add that I'm personally on the side of authors who support fanfiction and fanart (so long as no one's out to harm the original creator), and that I hope never to be proven wrong! :D

[1] Derivative works can in turn be protected under something called "fair use law." "Fair use" is generally broken down into four considerations:

Purpose and character of the derivative work. Things like parody, scholarship, commentary, and critique are protected are under fair use law. Also, things like whether the derivative work is non-commercial or transformative are also taken into consideration. A transformative work that significantly alters the characters and world of the original work (so how 50 Shades of Grey was ultimately totally different from Twilight, even though it started off as Twilight fanfiction) could be considered fair use. Likewise, if someone posts a free fanfic on, like, their Livejournal somewhere, it clearly isn't intending to hurt anyone or make a profit off of someone else's work, so it might be protected. This first consideration is generally the largest "protection" fanfiction has in the area of fair use, though it's hugely subjective and a matter of great debate: fanworks are by no means something that's unilaterally protected. But in short, if the purpose of a derivative work is not to profit from something, but to add new insight or transform it in some way instead of just ripping it off word-for-word for profit, it may be allowed under fair use.

Nature of the original work. A highly creative original work (like a novel or a film) is due more copyright protection than something like a newspaper article.

Amount and substantiality. If fanfiction uses substantial portions of the original work, especially the "heart" of it (such as key characters or plotlines), it is less likely to be considered fair use. If 30% of your work is just original text from the copyrighted work, your derivative fanwork may not be considered fair use.

Effect upon market's value. If a fanwork or fanfiction becomes competitive or harmful with the original work in any way, especially in a commercial sense (for example, fans are less likely to buy official sequels or licensed works because the niche is being filled by a fanfic), it probably won't be protected under fair use.

Even with all of this, there has been no case law that squarely addresses fanfiction in relation to fair use: it's all been judged by a case-by-case basis only. From this article: "works of fanfiction are more likely to constitute fair use if they are "transformative" with respect to the original work, if they are non-commercial, if they appropriate relatively little of the original work, and/or if they do not tend to detract from the potential market for or value of the original work."

Want some more interesting ways about the whacky ways fiction and fanfiction have intersected with the gray areas of fair use? Check out:

The My Immortal Memoir

The Larry Niven incident (and other legal issues with fanfiction)

Ship It, a fictional novel based on a real-life incident in the Supernatural fandom where a fanfic writer/shipper got shut down by one of the Supernatural actors when she asked him about homoerotic subtext in Supernatural... it's Ficception!

[2] GRRM's summary of the MZB incident in 2010:

Myself, I think the writers who allow fan fiction are making a mistake. I am not saying here that the people who write fan fiction are evil or immoral or untrustworthy. The vast majority of them are honest and sincere and passionate about whatever work they chose to base their fictions on, and have only the best of intentions for the original author. But (1) there are always a few, in any group, who are perhaps less wonderful, and (2) this door, once opened, can be very difficult to close again.

Most of us laboring in the genres of science fiction and fantasy (but perhaps not Diana Gabaldon, who comes from outside SF and thus may not be familiar with the case I am about to cite) had a lesson in the dangers of permitting fan fiction a couple of decades back, courtesy of Marion Zimmer Bradley. MZB had been an author who not only allowed fan fiction based on her Darkover series, but actively encouraged it... even read and critiqued the stories of her fans. All was happiness and joy, until one day she encountered in one such fan story an idea similar to one she was using in her current Darkover novel-in-progress. MZB wrote to the fan, explained the situation, even offered a token payment and an acknowledgement in the book. The fan replied that she wanted full co-authorship of said book, and half the money, or she would sue. MZB scrapped the novel instead, rather than risk a lawsuit. She also stopped encouraging and reading fan fiction, and wrote an account of this incident for the SFWA FORUM to warn other writers of the potential pitfalls of same.

That was twenty years ago or thereabouts, but that episode had a profound effect on me and, I suspect, on many other SF and fantasy writers of my generation.

[3] It would be like if a fan sent the Hunger Games author a fanfic that involved Katniss and Peeta's kids, Suzanne Collins was already in the midst of writing or was planning to write a sequel with Katniss and Peeta's kids, the two stories had significant overlap, and now Suzanne Collins feels like she can't publish the sequel as-is without either significantly redoing things just for the sake of being different from the fanfiction, or being accused of plagiarism by the fan. Better, in Suzanne Collins' mind, to never come into contact with fanfiction at all, and have both plausible deniability and an untainted well.

[blossomthepinkbunny]

My full Stolitz rant

Like many other people I really dislike Stolitz as a ship and the newest episode proved that further. I decided to just make a full rant about everything that comes to mind, instead of making multiple posts, focused on different general aspects/themes of HB or HH like I usually do. So this will not cover the issues I have with the writing of other characters like Stella or Octavia (I briefly talked about Stella and the aspect of woobyfying Stolas in my Adam post already). This also won't cover general problems with writing relationships in HB/HH or anything that breaches out of their relationship for that matter. It will probably also be focused mostly on Stolas because Blitzø isn't in the wrong in their relationship really.

One of my problems is that I've seen some people try to defend Stolas' actions by referring to Blitzø as a sex worker to which I just have to say:

1. He isn't a sex worker, he's an assasin. He only has a transactional relationship with Stolas, for which he didn't have a choice, otherwise he would lose his job and the opportunity to provide for his workers and daughter. It's not like we see him generally have sexual relations for payment with other people, only Stolas which makes sense, because he isn't a sex worker and doesn't want to be.

2. Even if he was a sex worker/qualifies as one in the specific relationship he has with Stolas, that doesn't mean that he owes Stolas anything other than sex. It's not Blitzø's fault for not wanting to have anything to do with Stolas and he doesn't owe him kindness, understanding or love after what Stolas put him through, just like real sex workers don't owe a romantic relationship to any of their costumers.

It was genuinely kinda refreshing to see Stolas finally acknowledge what their relationship isn't good and that Blitzø needs to be away from him. And seeing him give the Asmodean crystal to Blitzø was a nice gesture. But this is immediately made irrelevant by the confusion of what Stolas' character is even supposed to be here. He goes towards being somewhat likeable by understanding that what he did was wrong and having that finally be recognized and called out in the show. Called out by Blitzø, who has many good reasons to dislike him and give Stolas that reality check. But then the show wants us to pity Stolas again by making him say that god awful cringy line and making me immediately roll my eyes again. Because them acknowledging the bad actions of the character (something the show wants to pride itself on so badly) was something I wanted to see ever since HB started to victimize that stupid owl. I was ready to see this character less negatively when the reality of his actions finally hit him, with the genuine breakdown Blitzø has because of him. But he gets woobyfied immediately so now he seems like a manipulative hypocrite once again, because the conversation they have might as well go like this:

Stolas: I want you to be free because I realized that the relationship I set up wasn't right and I don't want you to feel forced to love me. I care for you and I want to love you, but at the same time, I don't want you to have an obligation to be kind to me or have a relationship with me.

Blitzø: Is this a joke?

Stolas: No, I am giving you freedom, so you can stop feeling forced to do whatever I say.

Blitzø: So you're acknowledging that you suck and that you weren't nice to me and you're giving me the freedom to choose how I will proceed with our relationship.

Stolas: Yes, I am.

Blitzø: Well I do think you suck because of the reasons you mentioned and I'm gonna give you my perspective of the things you said and explain just how badly you hurt me, especially when you're just sending me away like this, giving the impression that you're throwing me aside, after you got everything you wanted from me.

Stolas: How can you think of me like this?! I love you so much and you just think I suck?!

What reason did Stolas ever give Blitzø to like him? Apart from the coercion even, there is no common ground they have. They never hang out just casually or talk like normal people, who would realistically be able to form a relationship. The only date they had (from what we can assume from the context clues in the show) that wasn't just a meeting for sex was in Ozzies and that went south really quickly. It honestly reminds me of Twilight, where Bella and Edward are said to be a great couple (by the movies atleast, haven't read the books) when they have never had a normal conversation or an interaction that could give them chemistry. All of the interactions Stolas and Blitzø had so far were either scenes talking about/having/having just had sex or them talking/singing about how tragic their lovestory is. The only exception to that are the scenes were they are children and that's obvious because it would be weird to have literal children talk about sex or about the tragedy of their relationship, when they've only known eachother for a day or so. But even these scenes don't make them seem greatly compatible or even interesting because they only hung out for hardly a day and then didn't interact for like 30-40 years until they meet again (for the first time since they were children) and Stolas just immediately assumes Blitzø wants to fuck him.

And what also weirded me out is when Stolas said something along the lines of: "why do you always make this about sex?". As if Stolas ever gave Blitzø a sign that he wants to have anything but sex from him. Again, Ozzies is the only example for that and after that, their relationship was not that important until now. But even then, Stolas made sexual remarks towards him in "Seeing Stars" and talked about how good he is at sex in "Western Energy". And this sexual relationship they have is something Stolas set up, when he could've also just given Blitzø the book without forcing him to have sex and get closer by genuinely being kind to him. We don't even really know what he likes about Blitzø except for how he is in bed, so why am I supposed to care about their relationship and be sad about it not working out. Because they never give us the impression that either Blitzø's or Stolas' life would be better with the other in it (this is excluding sexual context becasue Stolas made it clear that he doesn't just want a sexual relationship in this episode). The only thing they have in common is that they both have daughters they struggle with but even there is a huge difference. Blitzø desperately wants a good relationship with Loona and constantly gives her affection and compliments, to which she responds with annoyance and abuse. Stolas has a daughter so understanding and just really neglected by him, on one hand because he always prioritized Blitzø over her (something he'd probably judge Stolas for, because spending time with a daughter who actually likes him and wants to spend time with him would probably be one of his dreams).

And nothing of this is even mentioning the sexual harassment Stolas puts Blitzø through. It starts with the pilot and the first episode, where their deal starts, at a point in the story where Stolas' whole character joke was just talking about wanting to fuck Blitzø. In the first episode their deal is established, a deal Blitzø hastily agrees to, because he is literally being hunted down, something Stolas is fully aware of. In the second epsiode Stolas makes sexual remarks towards Blitzø in front of his daughter and in the rest of the episodes he is in general very touchy and diminishing, something Blitzø is never shown to be a fan of. Stolas also very blatantly either fetishes Imps or is downright abusive towards them, showing that he doesn't see them as equal and that Blitzø's assumption about Stolas thinking he's less important is probably true (which is just a great setup for a relationship I'm sure).

In the end Stolitz is a confused, manipulative, victim blaming mess of a ship which could be used to great potential, if there was ever a point were they use this dynamic to genuinely portray a toxic relationship that shouldn't happen, instead of acting like they're meant to be together despite the toxicity and as if Stolas deserves my pity when Blitzø rightfully tells him to fuck off. Sometimes people just aren't meant to be a couple because they genuinely are too different or have other issues. But they can't have the story be about Blitzø breaking away from Stolas, because then the show couldn't mainly be carried by shipping and selling cutesy merch of a couple which actually sucks.

I do not care for the stupid owl and I probably never will. I do not think Vivzepop has the writing ability to turn this whole thing around and make Stolas end up as a well-written, flawed but still sympathetic character. The more they go into victimizing him by showing all the characters that call him out as abusive, inconsiderate or heartless (Stella, Octavia, Blitzø), the more I will dislike him and miss what the show once started as.

[sparklecarehospital]

I know you’re not working on any askblog things but will the sparklecare askblog ever return?

i've thought about this a lot, semi-recently. sorry for long post, i had a lot to say

see, the issue with asksparklecare is the fact it's supposed to "go along with canon events" and a lot of the time, the arcs will just abruptly end or change with no real connection between them. haunted was sort of my first attempt at putting a "story" on there, then again with the kissmas comic from 2021.

when i started cometcare for example, i wanted to take the generic "ask blog" format and turn it into a coherent, cohesive connecting story that just had interactive elements to make it engaging with readers as opposed to just making people ask the characters questions aimlessly. the main ask blog never really had that entirely, it was just sort of the classic 2010s-style ask blog, this is apparent in basically every arc on there.

it's stumped me quite a bit because now that i have this very different style of ask blog storytelling, the original ask blog feels weird to go back to and i don't feel the same passion or connection with it that i once did. it's a little bit frustrating. i tried to do an arc about the side patients but as you guys saw, i never even did it because i felt so out of touch with that old format of ask blog posts and i couldn't bring myself to work on it at all.

cometcare and darkermatters both have Stories to them, and each arc has a plot that is moved on by readers- even if i already have it written out, there are little things people can influence through the asks and it's a good way for introducing new characters or expanding on characters who we've already met. several times cometcare will return to specific characters to relay information or new details or exposition or something that their initial introduction didn't have.

it's a much more fun process for me to write actual stories in my AU blogs, instead of just....making the characters talk. and another thing- going alongside the main comic has problems, because sometimes there's information i can only reveal in the comic itself, and it's hard to keep up with it in general.

i enjoyed doing the kissmas comic because i got to do a "story" even if it wasn't interactive. i had fun repeating the concept on cometcare last december with help of the crew.

i'm sort of at a loss of what to do with the main ask blog at this point. as much as i miss doing stuff like that for main comic, i just don't find it FUN to do it that way anymore, i've become too attached to the storytelling aspects of my other ask blogs and it just doesn't feel the same exciting experience of watching people react to events and such.

if anyone has suggestions about what i should do with the main ask blog to solve this problem i'm open to hearing them, it would be nice to have some ideas because i'm really not sure what i want to do with it.

there was a time i had the idea of doing a backstory ask blog as an alternate main canon interactive story that followed similar mechanics as cometcare and darkermatters, but idk if everyone would be interested in that. that would probably be a separate thing if i ever did it.

thoughts, opinions, suggestions and ideas are all welcome in the replies or my inbox, i would love to have your guys' input since im making content you all would be engaging with after all

[alpaca-clouds]

Why I loathe CoD Hector

Something I really wanted to write a proper blog on, is Hector. I answered on another blog on this before, and wrote a shorter thing about this before. But I really wanted to write something on its own. Because I will once again iterate: While Hector in the animated series definitely gets to finish out his character arc, he works a lot better as a character than his game counterpart. And that even though the game came out at the time, where Castlevania tried to go more for storytelling.

Yet, there is this thing, and that mostly comes from it still being an old action-centric game... How the need of making the main characters of action games until sometime in the 2010s into the stoic kind kinda made them worse characters.

I said it before: The Castlevania games for the longest part never really were that interested in telling characterdriven stories and focused more on the gameplay. Which is very much fine. But even when they tried to include more story, for the most part they still keep the brutish, stoic protagonist. Even Alucard, despite looking like a beautiful princess, is very much the stoic male protagonist. This is just a thing with action media that was going on for way too long. Sure, even stoic characters could make for good fan interpretation in stuff like fanfics, it often is an issue that the media itself does not want to actually explore the characters emotions.

Or, to make it fairly clear: This has very much to do with this idea of toxic masculinity. A lot of old action media (not only games, but also movies and such) will not allow male action heroes to show emotional vulnerability, because that would be unmasculine in the eyes of the writers. Which then boils the characters down onto the supposedly "masculine" emotions, like anger and the urge for revenge.

And this is kinda where we get to Curse of Darkness.

We have this whole backstory through the manga, that goes into Hector's background and all that. While I will say that here I prefer the animated version, too, I will fully admit that this is just a subjective thing (I like that the animated version draws some clearer cultural aspects into it, while also giving Hector the agency of killing his abusers, rather than having it happen as an accident), because I definitely can see why people would prefer the manga version.

Where this ends, however, is already at the moment when Hector joins Dracula. Yes, I will fully admit that I am not a big fan of game!Dracula in general, though I will not go into the why here. He works as a game villain, I will admit that, though.

No, what I dislike about Hector's story with Dracula is more the: "And he becomes like the best forgemaster. Like he is so amazing and so strong, and did we tell you how amazing he is?" It goes too much into the power fantasy to me. While I get that the game canon heavily drew on this idea of the main conflict between Hector and Isaac being one of jealousy... I will just say, that a conflict of jealousy is actually so much more boring than a conflict of ideals. And the backstory by far had enough going on there to make it a conflict of ideals, as Hector did still - like in the animated version - not like the idea of killing thousands. Which could have been used for a lot of conflict, but... yeah.

I will still say, that for the most part, the backstory works. While I roll my eyes already at everything with Rosaly, because Rosaly is very much the incanation of the trope where this pure hearted girl saves the soul of the corrupted man (I don't know how this trope is called, but it is for sure a trope), it does work so far.

No, where Hector as a game character stops working is... at the game. Or rather in the moment that Rosaly does do the thing that she as the sole female character in this entire fucking story has to do: She dies so that her death can motivate Hector. And that is to me where game Hector as a character does stop working.

They could have given Hector any motivation to face off against Isaac. They had put up more than enough story fragments in the manga that they could have build from. They could have made it that Isaac wanted to go for revenge and before he could do it, Hector tried to go in there to protect the people he had now learned to love. They could have made it that Isaac tried to ressurect Dracula. They could have made it that Isaac tried to continue Dracula's work until Hector decided that he could not let his former friend do this, because Hector now knows better. There could have been several interesting and good motivations.

But no. Instead they went with: "Girl dead. Boy sad. Boy angry. Boy wants revenge." The fuck?! This is just so bad in terms of storytelling. It is just the refrigerated woman trope, in its most lazy iteration.

They could have given Hector an interesting motivation and conflict. But no, instead they went for revenge. Ugh.

But that was not enough for the writers of this game. Ooooooh no. If it was just that, I would still hate it, but I would be fine with it. Because let's face it, a lot of games use the "revenge for loved ones" trope. Sure, this game is not using it in the most creative way, and it could have done a lot better from the backstory that was set up in other media, but... It is fine. This is fine.

What is not fine however is Julia. I hate Julia. I hate everything about her as a concept.

And again, mind you. I absolutely would not have a problem with Julia if she was just "some girl" or just "Isaac's sister". Then Julia would be fine. It would even be fine if Hector caught feelings for her, even though I would once again roll my eyes at this.

No, what makes Julia so offensive is the fact that she looks and sounds like Rosaly. Meaning, that she explicitly, not just implicitly exists to be a replacement for Rosaly. And that just makes it all so, so badly written.

Worst of all: This gets never explained. Julia just is Rosaly's doppelganger. Just because... Well, because the writers of this game wanted to have their cake and eat it too. They wanted to motivate Hector by revenge for a dead girl, but also wanted to have him end with the girl. And it is just... misogynic writing. I am sorry.

It portrays women as "things" that can be easily replaced. And I hate this so, so much. It is the reason why, even though CoD might not be the worst game in the series, it is by far the one I loathe the most.

And they could have so easily done it differently. Either by not motivating Hector through Revenge in the first place, or by just making Julia a different person from Rosaly. Make her strikingly different and then have Hector fall for Julia. That would have been fine. Just this: "I broke one doll, but I will just get a replacement" thing that game has going is... horrible.

And yes, additionally I will say that another reason why I do prefer the animated version of Hector is, that he is not the stoic kind of character, but he is actually fairly vulnerable. He is a bit of an idiot who easily fall for people. He definitely does not get to have his power fantasy. But it is exactly this that I like. Because it is a story we usually do not get with male characters.

The story of Hector in the animated series is very much a story that would have usually been given to a female character. And I adore this fact. I adore how they switched the gender stereotypes around for this.

Yes, I am well aware that some fans of the games hated this, too. But I honestly have to say: Look, the game characters might have some minor differences, but all in all they all fall under the stereotype of the stoic action protagonist. Yeah, the series needed to switch this around a bit, because it would have gotten boring otherwise.

And frankly. I am sooooo sick of protagonists being all stoic all the time. Give us some variety. It won't kill these characters to smile from time to time... Or, you know, be vunerable.

[silentcryracha]

❍ ‗ Jealousy Headcanons (SKZ)‗ ❍

Pairings : Stray Kids x gn reader

Genre/warnings : Mentions of jealousy, might get a little toxic, sprinkles on fluff because we love a happy ending, not nsfw but it's suggestive in a few bits.

Summary : How, why and when the Stray Kids get jealous. Not a ranking.

Word count : 2.8k

A/n : None. As always, of course, this is just silly writing. Don't take it seriously :)

ps: There could be errors. Do NOT repost on other socials. Leave feedback if you feel like it, otherwise enjoy! ♡︎

Masterlist

.・。.・゜✭・.・✫・゜・。.

Chan ‗ ❍

I feel like Chan would generally be quite chill, simply because he's someone who doesn't like to hang out with toxic people, therefore would try to avoid issues from the start.

But while with some other members, fo example, the reason would be their good/non conflicting nature (which it is, for sure), I low-key think that in Chan's case could be because he's actually quite aware that when he gets mad/ annoyed with something, he's not gonna let it go easily.

He also wants to focus as much as possible on the positive and wholesome aspects of a relationship, but could unfortunately, when the time comes to have an argument, may be showing his worst self. Someone that he also hates and would like to keep locked away.

These situations wouldn't come up in relation to jealousy though, unless the relationship itself was toxic. In that case he'd either end things pretty quickly or spend a lot of time being upset and arguing, depending on how strong your bond is by that time. In the second case I think things would end up either very coldly or very messily.

Again, I feel like though he might get insecure at times, his reasons wouldn't be tied to any other person except himself.

He doesn't give a fuck about random people's opinions, but he cares about yours. Which is why feeling like he isn't doing his absolute best for you would be the worst.

For example, if a coworker or a friend was kind enough to make you a surprise/gift/bring you food to cheer you up, he'd feel upset that he didn't think about it first.

He'd start overthinking and doubting himself, maybe beating himself up over the fact that you haven't been on many dates lately or he's been too caught up in work.

He'd also probably go quiet because he feels bad,but you would catch up quickly and eventually reassure him and work things out.

If you did happen to get a little jealous (a normal amount I guess?) he would make sure to talk it out and understand what made you upset. Communication is fundamental and he knows it, even though sometimes he can't deliver quite well as he would like. He would always end up apologizing, though.

Now, about the kinky part, I do think that he would be into being a little possessive. Mostly because he's just so in love and attracted to you that the thought of other people even thinking of 'getting a piece' would drive him mad. Don't worry, he's gonna let it all out and remind you exactly who gets to make you feel good.

If you did that to him, he would find it extremely hot and amusing. He likes the fact that you're as desperate for him as he is for you, and would be more than willing to let you prove it to him however you wanted.

Minho ‗ ❍

Minho is quite similar to Seungmin I think, but with a sprinkle of Chan in the middle. He probably wouldn't stand a toxic partner, but I feel like he'd be more into it kink wise.

He seems like a pretty confident person, but overall I think that his own security would come from the fact that he wouldn't be with you if he didn't fully trusted you and respected you from the start.

I could see him getting a little possessive when he saw/felt other people being obvious with eyeing you or flirting. It would be more a question of pride than anything, though.

'Yeah, you like what you see? I fucking bet, too bad it's mine' or some shit like that. He'd really get off on you also being into it. I'd say that he would find it amusing when someone tried to flirt with you, because he knew you are his and would never betray him. He'd almost find it funny to see the disappointment on their faces.

He'd also appreciate you making some similar remarks, but accuse him of actually cheating or betraying you in some way and you lost him. You should know better, you should know HIM better.

He can play around a lot but when things get serious or too much into the emotional aspect then he'll take it very seriously, too.

Again, he wouldn't be with someone that he doesn't 100% trust or that wouldn't trust him, so it would come as an unwelcomed surprise and probably have a big fight over it before he dumps your ass.

Absolutely no time to waste on problematic behavior, especially within a relationship that should be his safe place. It would also leave him quite hurt and overthink it a lot, even if he wasn't in the wrong.

Changbin ‗ ❍

This man doesn't have a single bad bone in his body. That's why he would absolutely despise stuff like jealousy, but he is human too and sometimes humans do get a little into their heads.

His jealousy would come from either lack of attention (in his regards) or 'too much' attention (from other people to you). For Changbin it would never be THAT serious regardless, truly. He's a little silly so could very well just be jealous, mostly in a humorous way, of you for example petting and praising a dog.

He'd pout and go like 'What about me :(' and make you shower him with kisses and attention. That's truly the most he'd go in terms of being jealous of someone or something. He just really wants you to himself, okay?

When other people seem to be giving you 'too much attention' (which realistically is never, unless it's unwanted), it means that he just wishes that he did it first or more often. For example, if a friend bought you a specific thing that you've been wanting for a long time. He'd be really happy to see you happy, but low-key wished that he was the one who gave it to you, instead.

Overall unless it's something that could directly impact you in any way, he doesn't care. If a dude at the bar was being an asshole he wouldn't get jealous, he'd straight up fight (for you).

If you got jealous of him though, depending on the situations and the dynamic of your relationship I think that he'd either find it kinda cute that you wanted him for yourself (and make sure to shower you with attention). On the other hand, if the jealousy came from a more problematic mindset, he simply wouldn't put up with it and would be quite annoyed that you even implied about infidelity.

I feel like the whole 'You're mine' thing could potentially be a turn on in the bedroom but to a limited extent. He seems like the kind of guy that would lean into the more wholesome aspect of the relationship and avoid problematic feelings, even if it's just to mess around in private.

Hyunjin ‗ ❍

The thing about Hyunjin, is that he's a hopeless romantic. This is both a blessing and a curse, I think.

One one hand, you would expect him to have quite high standards for both himself and his partner, meaning that if he decides to be with someone they 100% have to have a similar mindset.

Between all the art, music, poetry, cinema and such, I feel like he would spend a lot of times just thinking and fantasizing about the things that he has seen/read/heard, and would probably end up creating a whole new idea of love in his mind.

Which, again, could be a blessing because the chances of him purposefully hurting you or cheating are very low. But, at the same time, would maybe end up reading too much into things or situations and end up disappointed/upset, even when he doesn't have reason to be.

He essentially could very well take a grain of salt and make it into a whole ocean. He'd also be pretty easy to fix things with I think, because he seems very direct. He's either the type to blurt out everything at once or be so overdramatically upset that you couldn't help but ask what was wrong.

Hyunjin wouldn't stand toxic or overly possessive behavior, I think. He'd end up having a big argument and break up pretty quickly if the relationship was fresh, but could try to 'gaslight' himself into thinking that it's just because you love him too much, until everything inevitably goes to hell (and you'd have a messy breakup). Would 100% cry for days on end and let it out through art (all kinds).

I have to admit though, that I don't think that he would be completely against a little jealousy. Again, he's a romantic (a little delulu, if you will) and would probably like a bit of the angst/teasing that comes with possessiveness/jealousy.

Would 100% do some movie-like stuff like come up to you and kiss you passionately in front of a person that was flirting/eyeing you up and down a little too much, just to prove the point.

Would also probably enjoy you doing the same (still a normal amount, I mean). This applies to the bedroom too, for sure. The words 'I'm yours/you're mine' are probably in a whole special chapter of his personal romance mind-book.

Jisung ‗ ❍

Yes, he would get jealous. To an extent. He's very sweet and likes to have fun and play around a lot, which is why I feel like this wouldn't show as much if he was in a healthy relationship, maybe with someone who is calmer than him.

In that case I think that the occasional jealousy would come mainly from him wanting to be the very best version of himself for you, and seeing you interact with people that seem to be able to give you something 'better than him', would upset him.

He would definitely bottle it up and either wait until you notice or explode in a random moment of vulnerability. He'd feel so bad afterwards. Why would it be you fault if he was not being enough for you?

I also feel like these intrusive thoughts and overthinking would never fully go away, but he'd try to tell himself to at least trust you and the loving words that you tell him. He tells himself that if you're still with him, there must be something that he's doing right at the end of the day.

If he happened to be caught up with a more jealous/obsessive person though, it would get SO messy. He can be a hot head sometimes, or so we've heard, so of course if you put two hot heads together what do you get? A big mess.

I feel like sometimes him being so much in his own head could make him seriously question his actions, especially if someone else is pointing them out to him.

I think that an obsessive behavior from a partner would be an absolute deal breaker, but unfortunately it'd depend on how deep he is into the relationship.

If you were at the early stages, then he'd have a way clearer mind to end things. But if maybe this had been going on for a while or he was truly into you, it would be a lot harder for him to deal with it in a healthy way. You would end up arguing A LOT and probably be toxic as hell with each other.

That being said, I think that he wouldn't necessarily have a thing/kinks related to this type of behaviors, but angry/make up sex would 100% be a thing. In that case, I'd expect him to go a little crazy with it.

Felix ‗ ❍

Felix seems to have a similar vibe to Jeongin, I think. He'd try as much as possible to avoid any type of uncomfortable/bad dynamics in a relationship.

For this to happen, though, he would have to be with someone that matches his vibe and that he could trust completely.

I don't think that there are things or situations that could get him actually jealous per se, but he could be feeling a little insecure in very random moments.

Like a casual comment on another person that you may find attractive and doesn't share some of his personality traits or features. Or maybe not as much as he'd like, which means that he'll think that's also what you would like, so he'd feel like he's not enough.

He would tend to get a little into his own head in these situations, which means that it would be up to you to actually understand if something was wrong. He'd eventually talk it out and forget pretty quickly about whatever the problem was, with the right amount of praise and affection.

I think Felix would be really turned off with a partner that would get overly jealous or possessive, especially if unjustified. BUT, I wouldn't rule out him actually being a little into it either.

For example if he was getting his make up or hair done and you'd say something like 'I wish that was my job' or something similar to tease him. I feel like he would find it amusing and genuinely boost his confidence, since of course he loves you and wants you to want him, too.

Could see him play around with it in the bedroom a little, especially to tease you. Careful or he might start purring if you'd go with something along the lines of 'The prettiest boy, and it's mine'

Seungmin ‗ ❍

He seems to be a quite cynical person. And can be a little insecure at times. Put these together, and you'll have a pretty emotionally unavailable man (sometimes).

The two things that could get Seungmin jealous are self doubt and possessiveness. He's someone who will love with all his heart, but that could scare him sometimes.

He would almost be afraid of loving too much and feeding into a 'delusion' (hence all the 'I don't believe in forever' stuff), that if broken, would absolutely crush him. He'd mostly blame/get mad at himself for allowing his heart to take over his mind.

He'd probably be quite afraid of not being enough > get embarrassed and mad at himself > shut you out because he's way too much in his own head. It would take some cooling off and some overthinking before he'd eventually even listen to you.

He's also someone who values actions way more than words, and this particular mindset would be useful whenever he's feeling a little jealous or possessive. It wouldn't be that easy to get him riled up, and he'd also probably not really act on it either. He gives off a petty/cold shoulder type of vibe more than an outburst.

Any type of jealousy would eventually be born from his own insecurity, not from him not trusting you. These situations would be fixed pretty quickly as soon as you'd manage to get him out of his head, whether it is from some sort of verbal reassurance or a physical action.

For example a hand hold at the right moment, including him in conversations, a random word of praise, a sweet phrase. On the other hand, this jealousy could very well be taken out in the bedroom too, I think. Would kinda get off on the whole 'I'm yours/you're mine' thing.

In general unless if you were are a pretty obsessive person yourself, he wouldn't give you reasons to get jealous. He seems pretty shy and quite careful with getting too comfortable, especially with strangers. He'd probably reflect on himself and eventually either work it out or be a deal breaker to him.

Jeongin ‗ ❍

Jeongin also seems like a person that wouldn't like the idea of jealousy or in general to deal with negative feelings.

He can get insecure sometimes but I feel like he'd end up making the problem about himself and wouldn't get 'triggered' by jealousy in regards of another person.

The only times in which he could get slightly annoyed is seeing you have fun with someone else that isn't him simply because he wants to be the one to make you happy all the time.

Jeongin really does look like the kind of guy who is just chill. If there aren't any issues within your relationship, he's not gonna be the first to make them. I also think that he wouldn't overthink on these type of things. If he decides to be with you in the first place it means that he trusts you and you probably have a similar mindset.

That's why I think that if you ever ended up being jealous over him, it would come as a surprise and not necessarily a good one. Of course it's different if you're joking, but he still wouldn't put up with it for long. I truly just feel like he hates the concept.

If he was the accused one, at first he'd try to talk it out and understand what made you react like that, and eventually apologize to make sure that he never does it again. But if your accusations came out to be meaningless and it was you being obsessive, he'd probably end the whole relationship. Straight up.

It doesn't feel like a possession/possessive kink would be a thing in the bedroom, either. Not denying nor thinking too much on a dom/sub type of dynamic at all, I just think that remarkings like 'I'm yours/you're mine' type of thing wouldn't be his cup of tea.

.・。.・゜✭・.・✫・゜・。.

[smytherines]

I often wonder if I would feel differently about The Staircase Scene if I had seen SAF when it first came out in 2016. The first time I saw it was probably around October or November of 2023, and like... the context is different now.

Whatever we want to say about the personal story arcs of these characters (and I know I'm in a tiny minority because, for me, killing Owen does not constitute a satisfying close to Curt's arc, that's totally fine), there is the very real issue of the sociopolitical context that this scene takes place within- both in their time (1961) and in ours.

One very cool thing about SAF is that, in order to understand these characters better, a lot of younger queer folks end up learning about the Lavender Scare, about Executive Order 10450- which officially prohibited gay people from working for the US government- for the first time. That's an incredible, precious thing to me. Yay queer history! It's important!

The show itself never addresses the fact that both the US and UK governments had very public, very brutal campaigns equating homosexuality with communism with being a traitor to your country. But if you want to understand these characters, and especially write fanfiction, you're really incentivized to teach yourself some fundamentally important aspects of queer history.

In the 54 Below concert, before singing Not So Bad, Brian Rosenthal talks about how when they were developing the show they thought N@zis were more or less a thing of the past, that they're fully aware of how differently that song might be taken now after an escalation into a more open embrace of fascism in the US. And they're absolutely right about that.

But I think that's also perhaps an issue with the staircase scene, or at least it is for me. Obviously homophobia and transphobia were not "fixed" in 2016, they were still massive problems resulting in violence and discrimination and brutality. But institutionally, at least, you could look at the situation and point to some things that were gradually getting better.

In 2016 trans youth in my state were legally allowed to receive gender affirming care. In 2024, they are not. It's not that homophobia and transphobia went away and then came back, but there was a very real resurgence of the use of the media and of governmental power to inflict pain on queer & trans people and chase them out of public life- bathroom bans, gender affirming care bans, Don't Say Gay laws, trying to make drag illegal, equating queer and trans people with pedophilia. There has been a big cultural shift back towards the same kind of violent governmental moral panic that our beloved Curt & Owen would have lived under.

Whatever we want to say about these characters and this story (and there's tons of fascinating debate there), there is still the base of a gay man killing his ex-lover ostensibly to protect US foreign policy objectives. Killing the man he loves- or loved, at least- to protect the secret that he is gay. And that hits different for me now.

I watch that scene and it is heartbreaking on a personal level, but its also heartbreaking as a queer person who just wants to scream "your government will destroy you for being gay, you don't owe them shit!"

Owen tries to explain that the surveillance network is happening, that the future won't wait for Curt to catch up. Barb has been saying she's working on the same thing for the US government the entire show, but Curt just kept ignoring her. And I just want to say "Curt, honey, what do you think your government is going to do to you with that surveillance system? Do you think you're useful enough to keep around even though you have sex with men? Because I promise you they will not care."

It feels tragic to me because on some level it seems like Curt would actually be safer with another gay man having control of all the world's secrets than he will be if the government he has dedicated his life to gets their hands on that same technology.

And the thing is, having a tragic ending doesn't make the show bad. This show is great. This scene is spectacular. It makes you think, it makes you feel things, it does all the stuff that great art is supposed to do. Absolutely none of what I'm saying here is meant to denigrate the show as a musical or a story or even a queer story. I hope it doesn't come off as me saying "actually this show is bad," because I don't feel that way at all.

Clearly I live and breathe this show. That's why I spend all my time on here analyzing every scene, every frame, every facial expression. I love this show so much that I can't help but deconstruct it and look at all its component parts- including the sociopolitical context both now and in 1961. Because that context, despite never being explicitly mentioned, is important to our understanding of these characters.

I love these characters so much that it's actually pretty difficult for me to watch A2P7 anymore, because the staircase scene is so emotionally devastating to me that it's hard to try to swing back into that more comedic tone (even though Spy Dance is a certified bop).

I'm not even sure what my point is with all of this, other than to say that Spies Are Forever is a show that is great and fun and funny as written/performed, and becomes gradually more emotionally devastating when you rewatch it or when you understand the subtext of it. When you can engage with the themes of gender and sexuality, surveillance and technology, trauma and trust, and tease out even more satisfying theories around this show.

So yeah. It's a musical. It's about spies.

[directdogman]

Hey dogman, idk if you answered this

Who, out of both DSAF and Dialtown, was your favourite to write and/or create?

It's very hard for me to pick favourites with my characters because I don't tend to give characters a lot of screen-time unless I find a character interesting or fun to write. You've caught me in a talkative mood, so warning, there's an onslaught of text coming!

DSaF: Dave was the most fun to write for, as I remember it. I mean, the guy is the walking personification of chaos and even when he's being constructive (eg, rigging robots to do insane stuff), it's usually in a destructive capacity. Dave will do LITERALLY ANYTHING but contribute to society in meaningful/valuable ways.

In terms of what character-writing I was most 'proud' of, I was also pretty happy with Dr Henry Miller, as a villain. Namely the research he embarked on, described in his logs in DSaF 3 (which the fandom evidently agreed with, as I got really strong feedback on those logs.)

One issue a lot of people (including myself) have with canon William Afton is that he's this kind of mad scientist character but his research doesn't really seem to be... idk, going anywhere? Other than using remnant (soul nectar?) to make kids possess robots, it's kind of a mystery how he got to this point he did from running a bad fast food restaurant. William gets fleshed out motivations in TSE and even then, it mainly revolves around his relationship with Henry Emily, iirc. It's actually pretty accurate to how real serial killers think, imo, but there's a pretty wide berth between this kind of serial killer and becoming a sci-fi fast-food mad scientist... So, I decided to try to bridge that gap.

DSaF Henry's logs actually mention where the idea for his research came from, namely the fact that he existed in a world with normal scientific rules just like ours and seemingly discovered something supernatural, and he approaches it like an amoral scientist would - trying to figure out how to figure out more about the fabric of reality using the newly discovered phenomenon of possession. The 'joy of creation' phrase people pulled from Golden Freddy's phone call in FNaF 1 is given context - Henry is trying to find out what's on the other side (and eventually, how existence itself formed.)

There's other aspects to his character that make him more interesting too, like the implication that his research is partially an excuse for him to act on an underlying sadism (with scenes implying that he inflicts damage on others than can't be justified as assisting with his research.) His background as a dissident/quack laughing-stock scientist (thanks to pushing his soul theory in a best-selling book, which is considered pseudoscience) BEFORE he embarked on his journey to become a fast food tycoon also makes it less farfetch'd that he'd be capable of y'know, harvesting human souls intentionally to continue his research?

I had more for the character on paper that people haven't seen but some of it wasn't revealed due to it feeling a bit too disturbing to publish. None of the contents would've been all that controversial, more just too tonally disturbing when written about in detail (like a omitted part from his backstory/lore post where he managed to pick up a hazy audio of his wife + son's crying from the radio of the car his wife/son drowned in and reacted with genuine elation upon realizing he'd discovered a new scientific phenomenon (as this was the first time Henry witnessed soul-possession.)) Yeah.

I don't feel much of a need to revisit Henry as a character because as a series villain, he was pretty thoroughly-written and he did his job effectively... And his fate was well earned! (He even got an epilogue short-story a few years back, further cementing his fate!)

Dialtown: From the characters/writing that the fandom has seen? Tough to say. I genuinely really like every DT character. Gingi and Mayor Mingus are two of my favourite characters to write for because they're both really insistent and react to adversity in a really comically indignant way. Mingus is more like Gingi than she cares to admit in very specific ways, which is the core hypocrisy of her character - she's one of the most abnormal things IN Dialtown, and spends the game on a quest opposing abnormality that she, herself, can't stand.

Many absolute rulers have debilitating physical and/or mental cruxes and despite that, usually have the final say on what is/isn't okay, often guided by arbitrary preferences. It's funny to remember all of the ancient kings and emperors who dictated how others should act, talk and even think, when very many of them themselves were anything except a good reflection of their own subjects! It's an irony I quite enjoy and leads to a fun character to write for!

My favourite DT writing is probably some of my Callum Crown speech drafts. I have a definite bias here since Crown's character is based on many figures I've encountered in my own reading (and his story relates to topics I enjoy reading about.) A lot of that is real nerd shit that wouldn't be interesting to 99.9% of DT fans (like a long conversation where Crown + Milt discuss a campaign speech Milt wrote for Crown and they bicker about if the wording/arguments used are truly honest.) Again, not super relevant to Dialtown-proper, but it explains a lot about why the world of DT ended up the way it did.

Realistically, the story of Dialtown itself is basically a weird little epilogue to a story that ended decades upon decades ago, centered around a bunch of small-town nobodies circling around the carcass of the last surviving main character of the old story.

I'm also very happy with Gingi's character partially because I know more about Gingi's past/future than you guys do. Gingi has such rotten memory that Gingi's backstory before DT's story begins is basically a complete mystery. Thanks to Gingi never getting close enough to any humans before laying its eggs, there's nobody in Gingi's life that can fill in the gaps. Companionship means so much to Gingi because prior to meeting The Gang, Gingi is aware of a massive and unknown block of time that's a complete mystery precisely because Gingi had nobody in its life. To Gingi, this time was basically akin to being non-sentient or dead, and Gingi would never go back.

While I was making DSaF, I drafted a ton of other stories on paper. I considered making most of them, but decided not to for various reasons, despite getting some solid feedback from collaborators. Bits of almost all of those project ideas made it into DT, with Gingi having traits from several other main characters I prototyped years and years ago. This includes where Gingi came from and what exactly Gingi is. I don't want to mislead people into thinking Gingi is more important than it is, like Gingi is the key to unlocking DT lore (I promise there's a LOT of aimless scuttling/devouring in Gingi's past and relatively little else!) BUT: Of everything from those old scrapped projects, Gingi is what I decided deserved to survive the most. And that has to count for something.

One day I'd love to make sequels to DT and perhaps explore some of the stuff I've described above, like why the hell the world of DT is the way it is or maybe where the hell Gingi spawned from. Thanks

[anneapocalypse]

Why Vivienne Needs the Inquisition

No one 'winds up' at Court, my dear. It takes a great deal of effort to arrive there.

–Enchanter Vivienne to the Inquisitor

An ask I received (referring, I think, to something I said in this post, though I've alluded to it at other points as well):

How/why is Vivienne's position at court shakier than it seems? (Please publish this anonymously.)

Thank you for asking! I’ve wanted to write something on this subject for a while, so I appreciate the push to get it all down. It’s something I find really interesting about Vivienne, because it's something she doesn't want the Inquisitor, or anyone, to know, so it's all subtext in the game. Vivienne is a character who always holds the player character at arms' length--a bit less so when she likes them, but there is always some distance there. As such, she's a difficult character to get to know.

And while I do have some issues with the way Vivienne is handled in the game, particularly with narrative and quest design, I won’t be touching on those heavily here. For this post I want to focus on what can be determined about her motivations from the character as written.

Vivienne can be recruited to the Inquisition after the Inquisitor's first trip to Val Royeaux. Notably, she seeks out the Inquisitor's attention herself, inviting them to a gala at the Duke of Ghislain's estate, and also notably, once recruited she will not leave the Inquisition and cannot be forced to leave, no matter how low her approval of the Inquisitor. This is also something I have seen people question: why can't you kick Vivienne out, and why won't she simply leave if she disapproves of your choices? I hope this post will answer that question as well.

The most critical aspect of Vivienne's character to understand, I think, is that she has no stable institutional power. She is not a noble. She has no familial connections of the sort that can help even a mage to keep their head above water. She is a woman who was taken from her family at a young age and raised in an institution, and who has used all her wit and charisma to make the very best of that situation for herself.

Vivienne's position as First Enchanter of Montsimmard is mostly an achievement within the Circle itself. Montsimmard itself, however, was also a stepping stone to influence outside the Circle. Personally, I think the fact that Vivienne declined to join any fraternity when she became a full Enchanter, a shocking move at the time, indicates that she held ambitions outside the Circle from a young age. And Montsimmard was the perfect proving ground for her, a major Orlesian city whose ruling family maintain close relations with the Circle. In The Masked Empire, the Marquise de Montsimmard boasts about dining at the Circle, and she and her husband wear masks adorned with lyrium crystals which we are told were a gift from the First Enchanter. It seems likely, though not confirmed, that this was Vivienne herself.

(Incidentally, it is a real shame that Vivienne’s character seems to have solidified so late in the game’s development, because in retrospect I really feel her absence in the novels. She gets a brief mention in The Masked Empire as Madame de Fer, and absolutely nothing in Asunder, which we'll come back to.)

It seems that the Montsimmard mages were called upon with some regularity to entertain the court, and this is how Vivienne first caught the attention of Duke Bastien in 9:16 Dragon. Within a year, she had moved into a suite in his estate. Her position came under attack for the next few years, but nonetheless, after a single meeting with Empress Celene in 9:20 Dragon, she became the newly-crowned Empress's Court Enchanter.

(Edited to add: It seems to be sometime after this that Vivienne became First Enchanter of Montsimmard, at "an age young enough to cause scandal," though the date is never confirmed that I can find. Incidentally, as @shrovetidecat brought to my attention in the notes, Fiona is also supposed to have been Grand Enchanter of Montsimmard, which given that may be a lore inconsistency, unless Vivienne is only meant to have taken the position after Fiona rose to Grand Enchanter—and I'm not sure why a 40-year-old First Enchanter would be scandalous.)

By the time she meets the Inquisitor, she is likely somewhere in her 40s, and has been the Enchanter to the Imperial Court and the Mistress to the Duke de Ghislain for twenty years. She regularly mingles with the court and has built a practically unprecedented influence for herself in Orlesian high society.

And it's all about to fall apart, for three critical reasons.

First, the obvious: the mage rebellion. One cannot be First Enchanter of a Circle that no longer exists, though Vivienne certainly tries. A majority of mages, even if by a razor-thin margin, have declared that they do not recognize the Circle's authority—and therefore Vivienne's authority as a loyal Enchanter within that system.

I think Vivienne's dialogue with the Inquisitor and her remarks if taken to Redcliffe reveal a deep frustration and resentment of Grand Enchanter Fiona, who called for the vote to leave the Circle and now leads the rebel mages. Vivienne of course handles this in the manner to which she is accustomed, the culture of the Imperial Court, in which trading in verbal jabs and barely-veiled insults is a standard matter of social one-upsmanship. Outside of that environment, she comes across as petty and rude, which is an interesting point of characterization in itself: Vivienne has thrived in the court environment, but she does seem to have a bit of trouble adapting her manner to different circumstances, where that sort of thing might not benefit her. But what she's trying to do is frame herself before the Inquisitor as the reasonable and respectable mage, and Fiona as misguided and pitiable. How well this goes for her, of course, depends on who the Inquisitor is. But the effort itself kind of reveals the shaky ground she's standing on.

In her dialogue with the Inquisitor, Vivienne claims that as the rebel mages follow Fiona, the loyal mages follow her. But where are these loyal mages? There's maybe one or two mages we meet in the game (Enchanter Ellendra comes to mind) who seem to respect Vivienne's word. But if the loyal mages look to her as a leader, why is Ellendra alone in a cave in the Hinterlands to begin with? Why doesn't Vivienne bring a group of these loyal mages with her to Skyhold?

I think it's because Vivienne doesn't truly have followers among the mages, the way Fiona does. This is the story she's telling the Inquisitor, to capitalize on the idea that the rebel position is not a consensus, and also that she still has influence among a significant number of mages. The truth is, she doesn't. She’s spent most of her life courting influence outside the Circle, not in it. She has presided over a Circle where she doesn’t even live day-to-day. I can’t imagine that has particularly endeared her to many of her fellow mages, even the ones who are loyalists or moderates.

Contrast this with Wynne, a pro-Circle Aequitarian who is deeply involved in Circle life despite undertaking sanctioned work outside the tower, and is also deeply involved in the events leading up to the vote for independence. Whatever the Doylist reasons for Vivienne's absense from Asunder, the fact remains: she's just not there. She has no presence in the events leading up to the rebellion. When speaking critically of Fiona's vote, she discusses it in the context of Anders' attack on the Kirkwall Chantry, and says nothing of the circumstances surrounding Fiona's push for a vote—not the revelations about Tranquility, not the conclave (no not that Conclave, the conclave of mages at which Fiona called for the vote for independence), not the subsequent massacre by the templars and the remaining mages' decision to stand and fight. And perhaps most notably, no one mentions Vivienne, positively or negatively, during the events of Asunder. Not once. We are left with the conclusion that Vivienne is simply not heavily involved in Circle politics, no matter what impression she may wish to give the Inquisitor. Her influence does not lie within the Circle.

And I think Vivienne knows this, and realizes that it's suddenly become a big problem for her.

The second big problem is Morrigan.

Vivienne has had the favor of the Empress herself for twenty years. She has, by others' accounts, managed to turn the position of Court Enchanter from "little more than court jester" to a position of influence and respect. And then the Grand Duke attempts a coup, and the Empress's elven lover runs away with a dangerous secret, and suddenly the Empress is enlisting the services of some unwashed swamp witch while Vivienne is standing right there!

Like I cannot overstate what a absolutely galling slap in the face it would be to Vivienne that even as she is attempting to uphold the legitimacy of the Circle and thus of her own authority within it, Celene effectively creates the "Arcane Advisor" position as "Court Mage 2: Apostate Boogaloo" just so she can get advice on non-Circle-approved magics. Advice that Vivienne could not give even if she wanted to, even if the Empress asked, because she has no knowledge of eluvians and ancient elven magic.

Both Dorian and Cole needle Vivienne about her jealousy of Morrigan, and I think quite accurately, no matter how quick Vivienne is to deny it.

Her influence over the Empress is fast eroding. She has been replaced in all but name.

And the third and most personal big problem is Bastien's illness.

Vivienne has enjoyed a romance with one of the empire's most influential nobles for twenty years. She has lived in his home and been on good terms with his wife until her passing. Her influence in the Imperial Court owes a lot to Bastien's affections. Bastien is not only a Duke but a member of the Council of Heralds, the political body responsible for overseeing matters of titles and inheritance in Orlais. They are quite literally the most powerful group in the country; even the Empress rules at their favor, without which she would never have gained the throne in the first place.

And now Bastien is dying, something Vivienne takes care not to mention to the Inquisitor at first. It's not until after the ball at the Winter Palace that Vivienne asks the Inquisitor for help with her potion in a last-ditch attempt to prolong his life—and even then she does not reveal her true purpose until after the Inquisitor has returned with the wyvern's heart. And while it's possible to interpret multiple ways, I personally believe from her response to his death that she did care for Bastien. She didn't need to bring the Inquisitor to his deathbed at all, if she wanted to continue concealing his illness, something she's taken care to do up until that point. It bespeaks a measure of trust that she allows the Inquisitor to see her so—in her grief, as well as in her loss of position.

Because Bastien's death is a terrible loss for Vivienne socially as well as personally. Bastien's son will inherit his estate, and whether Vivienne is allowed to go on living there will be entirely at his discretion. Perhaps he will permit her to stay, but she cannot count upon his grace, nor upon the protection she enjoyed with Bastien any longer; and furthermore if she is allowed to stay, it will be a favor to her, making her beholden rather than granting her greater influence. She won't have the dignity of being Bastien's widow; she is his mistress, and respected as that position may be in the Orlesian court, it gives her no true claim to his family.

Vivienne is about to lose everything she has built for herself.

Without Bastien, without Celene, she will be left with… what? The position of First Enchanter to a Circle that no longer exists? If her own best-case scenario occurs and the rebellion is halted and the Circles are reinstated, then she still loses all the freedom she has gained and is forced to return to a Circle tower herself—a sphere in which, as previously discussed, she holds less influence than she would like the Inquisitor to believe. Even if she remains First Enchanter, it's hard to see this as anything but a massive step down in the social hierarchy, the beginning of a long slide into what the Fade reveals as her greatest fear: irrelevance.

It's a humiliation that Vivienne cannot bear.

This is why she won't leave the Inquisition, no matter how much she may despise the Inquisitor. Vivienne needs the Inquisition far more than she lets on. This even puts the petty low-approval furniture-moving scene into context. Yes, she’s doing it to snub the Inquisitor, but that doesn’t actually gain her anything. I think it’s deeper than that. The Inquisition was Vivienne’s fallback plan, and it’s not going well. The Inquisitor is making her look bad, she is finding no avenue to further advancement here, but she can’t leave. So, her response is to try to reclaim some sense of control over her life, asserting a kind of power she had at Bastien’s estate and was likely denied in the Circle: control over her own space.

Even if Bastien were to live a bit longer, Vivienne really has nowhere higher she can climb in the Imperial Court. She can't become a noble herself. She can't marry Bastien, or any other noble for that matter, because she is a mage. And I'm sure she's highly aware of this fact. Bastien is several years a widower himself; it is not his former marriage that prevents him from marrying her, now. It is her status as a mage which bars her from entering a noble family, legally, socially, politically. That Bastien never seems to have raised the question at all speaks to the fact that no matter how much he may have stuck his neck out for Vivienne, there was a line even he was not interested in crossing.

So where does she have to go from here?

Along comes the nascent Inquisition. Shaking things up. If any organization could rattle the gilded walls of the Chantry, it's this one.

Why not take a stab at the Chantry, at this point? What does she have to lose?

It didn’t really sink in for me for several playthroughs because she isn't wearing cleric's garb, but Bastien's sister Marcelline, who visits Skyhold after his death with Bastien’s son? She's a grand cleric. One of the surviving grand clerics who will decide the next Divine. Vivienne involves the Inquisitor in her plan to save Bastien, a plan she likely knows will fail—but she puts in the effort. She then introduces the Inquisitor to Grand Cleric Marcelline, having told her how the Inquisitor came to her aid. Marcelline expresses gratitude: “Madame de Fer has told us what great trials you faced, trying to save my poor brother’s life.” Bastien’s son Laurent is a powerful ally in his own right, now a member of the Council of Heralds, but also likely the one who will decide whether Vivienne keeps her suite in the Ghislain estate.

And if the conversation goes well, Vivienne tells the Inquisitor that it was "quite the triumph." If the Inquisitor expresses confusion, she patiently explains the influence that both Laurent and Marcelline wield, and that they have now secured the trust of both. If Vivienne becomes Divine, Marcelline’s favor no doubt goes a long way in getting her there.

Of course Vivienne will continue to take a conservative position on the mage question. A mage looking to insinuate herself into the Chantry hierarchy would have to, just as a mage seeking the freedom to consort with the court would have to. In the same way that a Hawke with aspirations of seizing the vacant seat of Kirkwall's Viscount must side with the templars at the end to show the nobility that they represent stability and order, the Chantry's first mage cleric must be pro-Circle, pro-templar, conservative to the bone. Vivienne seems to recognize this as far more important than actually appearing devout. It's also fascinating to me how little she bothers to make any pretense of a personal faith, instead always discussing the Chantry as an important social institution and political body. And this attitude doesn't seem to impede her chances at the Sunburst Throne very much, no more so than being a mage already would.

Vivienne knows exactly what she's doing. She always has.

Vivienne comes to the Inquisition seeking power and influence in the Chantry because her position among the nobility is falling apart. Whether she comes in with the intention to reach for the Sunburst throne itself is debatable, and I personally think it might have been the intent that she does have that ambition but seeks to let the Inquisitor think it was their own idea, though I'm iffy on how successful that is if it was the intent. Nonetheless, I do believe that Vivienne comes to the Inquisition with the intent to seek influence within the Chantry, realizing that the recent upheaval may offer her a unique opportunity to do so. And depending on how closely the Inquisitor aligns with her goals, she may succeed quite dramatically.

References

Codex Entry: Madame de Fer

Talking with Vivienne at Haven and Skyhold

Vivienne's high disapproval scene

After Bastien's death

Banter with Cole

Banter with Dorian

The World of Thedas vol. 2, pp. 235-239 (hardcover edition)

Dragon Age: The Masked Empire, p. 31 (paperback edition)

[nonbinarypirat]

Hello! I really like your character analysis from m!ik. I wanted to ask you what do you think of Amerie? And her influence on Iruma? And their relationship?

Great question! Okay, I’ll go in order of your questions since you have a few for me :)

Okay, so I have issues with how Ameri is written on the character, some of the few issues I have with Nishi’s writing thus far. But before I talk about the negatives I want to focus on the positives of Ameri and her character because I do think she has a lot of potential that I hope we get to see! Ameri is a classic capable but soft character type that we see in both her romance fantasies but also her deep care for her fellow students. She isn’t just a student president because of the prestige or power it could give her, it’s because her ideal is for every demon to be proud of themselves and their authentic selves. And this is a quality in her that I find deeply profound and beautiful. She’s proud of herself and she wants others to be proud of themselves as well. And what I like about Iruma and Ameri is that she encourages him to strive for more, more than he ever could have dreamed of in the beginning. And he makes her enjoy herself more rather than overworking herself. He makes her be still more, stop to appreciate the little things. She also has the power to inspire others, a nature born leader, and one that is willing to do anything for her fellow students. Not to mention she has given her fellow student council members a place to belong and by doing so, they have deep respect and loyalty to her. And for demons who are inherently selfish and idealistic, this says a lot. They aren’t with her because of her strength, they care for her and I think that speaks volumes in itself.

What I have a problem with is how much her growth is tied to iruma. I think in this Nishi failed at making her an independent character. For instance, we don’t get to see her work towards rank 7, which would help her in her main ambition. We know she wants to take over for her dad, but we don’t know why that’s so important to her yet. And we don’t get to see the steps she takes towards that goal. Her growth is her progress in her relationship with Iruma and I think that’s a let down. Like I said, I love how she inspires and pushes iruma to be a better version of herself. I enjoy that a lot about their relationship. But I don’t find myself interested at all in the romance aspect of the two, mostly because of how they met each other. The trope is that in so many animes and mangas (and the romance genre in general) have two characters run into each other and instantly fall for the other. They went for the trope, we had some laughs about it, but then it kind of just… stuck around? It’s making fun of the clique while also adhering to it and to me it just didn’t land. I think for the joke to work and to make the relationship flow better, the immediate attraction should have quelled and from there a more slow burn of feelings for Ameri. I think if she didn’t become so Iruma crazy so soon into the story, it could have made a more compelling relationship compared to the current one we have. Right now, besides motivating each other I don’t see much in the way of their relationship? I think it’s also hard because we see so little of her in the actual plot and story so the relationship feels like it’s going at a snail’s pace while also going too fast when we do get to see them interact again to make up for the lack of Ameri. It’s weird, they’ve gone on three or four dates (or at least, we can categorize them as dates even if both characters haven’t called it that) but at the same time it’s like nothing has happened for them. I guess besides Ameri realizing her feelings, Iruma blushing when hugging Ameri, and the talk with Henri. I wish the relationship was more friendship focused or the feelings took longer to develop. Because she’s a busy woman and she’s a year above Iruma, we don’t see her actively take part of the plot often and it just makes it hard to get to know more personal stuff about Ameri.

This isn’t to say I’m a Ameri x Iruma hater, I just don’t find their relationship a fun part of the story. I do also admit to having a bias for the love trio when it comes to Iruma ships. But I do hope that the relationship develops more in an in-depth way because I could see her and their relationship becoming more interesting if Nishi takes the time to write her (in my opinion) better.

[piperholmes]

I wasn’t planning on writing anything about Chenford because I’m not trying to start an argument (not that I expected many will read this any way 🤣), but I have a lot of thoughts jumbled up. I think it would be helpful for me to just get them down, so I am better able to absorb what has been shared by others. I love a good discussion! Especially one centered around some form of literature.

(If you are reading this, then just let me preface with this is me really just free writing what’s going through my head. I definitely am not telling anyone else how to feel, react, or process this storyline—nor do I expect anyone to agree with my ramblings.)

For me, I think a major issue I have is with the breakup trope itself—particularly the “I’m not good enough for you, so I can’t be with you” trope. In my experience, this argument usually comes from the male character in a relationship. Romance novels are riddled with this set up; I’ve seen it in films and television plenty of times. It almost always comes from the guy. (And I acknowledge the majority of media I consume is M/F romance). The problem I have reconciling this concept is because it feels like this happens because the guy in the relationship feels comfortable and is willing to make the decision for both of them, and is often unwilling to listen to his partner’s thoughts or feelings. There is something inherently misogynistic in that, and it has never sat well with me.

I thought a lot about why Tim was upset about the 5 player trade, and while I don’t think the show did a particularly good job of explaining it, I think it boils down to the fact that Lucy made a decision about Tim’s life without talking to him about it. Even though it came from a sincere, caring place and had (for Tim at least) a positive outcome, it wasn’t right for her to make that decision on her own. If the argument is being made that Tim is walking away from their relationship because he feels (right or wrong) it’s best for Lucy, it just seems odd to me that Tim would choose to (essentially) do the same thing to Lucy after it was so upsetting to him.

Now, was Tim in a heightened emotional state? Absolutely. Does that impact a person’s reasoning? 100% But I think where this situation breaks with what has been established, is Tim’s choice to just walk away without discussion. Something that made me fall in love with Chenford in the first place was Tim’s willingness to listen to Lucy even when he was emotionally struggling. Outside Isabel’s apartment with the drugs, when she got on to him about being pissed over the report following the virus scare, his later acknowledgment over his behavior in the pilot with the Hispanic gentleman, and so on. To have Tim just walk away from her communicates one of two things: either he was willing to make the decision but wasn’t willing to deal with the consequences or he was so convinced he was right, he wasn’t interested in what Lucy would have to say. Neither are a particularly good look for Tim, and, again, why I just don’t really like this trope. (I would be saying the same thing about Lucy if she were the one doing this-in fact, I think she seriously mishandled her break up with Chris, but I definitely wasn’t emotionally invested in their relationship. So, sorry Chris; you don’t get a post 🤣).

Another aspect of the trope I find ridiculous is how it should essentially impact all relationships this character has; if Tim isn’t good enough to be with Lucy as a romantic partner then he should feel that way about being a friend to Lopez, a brother to Genny, an uncle to her kids, and so on. Otherwise, to isolate this feeling to specifically the romantic partner is just…weird? “I’m going to end our relationship because you deserve better, but just you. I’m going to keep all my other relationships.” Like, I don’t know, that just feels super icky. And, based on the preview for the next new episode, it definitely seems like Tim is going to spiral into pushing people away/isolating, but where is the line drawn? What if Tim had a kid? (And I know hypotheticals are probably not the best here, but I warned this would be meandering 🤪) Would he walk away from his own kid because he didn’t feel good enough? That definitely doesn’t make sense to me, but, again, it just highlights the pitfalls I run into with the trope itself and why I cringe when it is used. My view of Tim—and by extension Chenford—is now informed by what I see as the implications of the trope.

It’s incredibly off putting that now Tim and Lucy’s parents (oh, gosh, and I just realized, even Nolan) essentially fall into the same category. Do you think Lucy’s parents were so dismissive of her wants and hurtful because they hated her or didn’t love her? I am 100% sure it’s because they thought they were loving her. It doesn’t make it right or healthy, but I’m sure they thought they were doing what was best for Lucy. And John made the decision to end their relationship to “protect” Lucy, and I remember thinking the same thing about him that I think about Tim now. I really thought Tim was different and understood what Lucy had been through in her life, and, ultimately at this point, makes me question how I feel about Chenford overall.

I also want to say that I don’t begrudge Tim acknowledging something in him that wants to change and be better (openly encourage such self reflection and growth in fact). I’m also (pretty) sure this will ultimately lead back to then getting back together, and maybe even Tim being a better partner. I’m simply saying that using this particular trope in order to facilitate that doesn’t vibe with what I believe the show has established about Chenford, and it would have been very interesting (and, for me, preferable) to see how they could have told that story avoiding this cliche. That’s all.

Ok, if anybody made it this far, thanks for sticking with it. I’m always open and interested in differing perspectives and interpretations, and nothing I’ve said is my set-in-stone opinion, just my current opinion 😜.

[rapha-reads]

IWTV rewatch

Season 2 episode 1 [What Can The Damned Really Say to the Damned] - part 4/4

- And now... Mood shift, setting change, back to Dubai, 2022, and the 77 year-long lie. And lord oh lord, we jump right into it with the shot of the bedroom being a cell and Armand selling Louis' art without even telling him the works are up for sale. Greaaaat. This is gonna be fun.

[Louis] "'Could I see the pages we removed? Of Claudia's diaries?'

[Armand] 'We made an agreement.'

[Louis] 'I don't know what else is blurred or misremembered.'

[Armand] 'My name is in some of those pages.'

[Louis] 'I sit across from him and reckon with the knowledge I don't know what other misrememberings made into it. I won't share them with him but I need to read them again.'"

Brb, need to SCREAM. Oh, the control Armand us exercising over Louis... The way he micromanages every aspect of his life. The way Louis has to bargain for everything he wants, and the way he thanks (thanks!!!) Armand for every breadcrumb thrown his way. The way Armand cares more about his image, his reputation, his grip on Louis, than Louis' well-being and peace of soul and mind. And the way the scene is shot and designed, the bars behind the bed and the skyscraper settling, the lack of any colors and any homey furniture, the huge bed with an ocean separating them, contrasting with the comfy house and room of 1132 rue Royale, and how Lestat and Louis used to sleep entwined in each other's embrace... I will go mad.

- BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA THE ENTRANCE HAND IN HAND, ARE THEY SERIOUS. Oh, this is too hilarious. And how they drop the hands as soon as they're seated, yeah, real convincing, fellas.

- Oh, Devil's Minion's crumb! Armand responding to Daniel by mimicking his "Yeah" and those big eyes looking so amused and fond at that old man. Couldn't care less about the Loumand, I'm here for the Devil's Minion. What a performance, Louis rubbing Armand's shoulder, lmao.

- Daniel shutting down Armand immediately is hilarious. "Sure, sire, you're on the record, but you still haven't made an appearance in the story so for now stfu and wait for your turn". No wonder Armand goes crazy about Daniel, that guy doesn't know how to be afraid. And second shoulder pat, Lou, hon... You're enjoying this, aren't you. You are enjoying the way Daniel puts Armand back in his place, something you haven't managed to do in years, despite what you both like to pretend.

- Oh, I love that piece of music! That one is "The Whole World Was Ready to Return" and it is gorgeous. It's played here, as Claudia and Louis go to Paris, and at the end, when Louis issues his threat/warning to the vampires in Dubai. Very thematic. The music in s2 is different from the music in s1, by the way. S1 soundtrack had very folk/blues undertones, New Orleans style, while s2 is much more orchestral/symphonic, Paris style. The music adapts itself to the setting, and I adore that. It gives so much more texture to the story.

- [Louis] "The war had turned off the lights, stripped its streets of their beauty, sent its avant-garde into exile. But now, the whole world was ready to return, to remake their lives. Pilgrims, on their hopeful way."

Nah, the avant-garde, at least artistic, was there, just, waaay underground or dangerously flirting with censorship and hidden meanings. In Paris itself during the war, there were several plays written and played against fascism while the Gestapo was patrolling the streets. Notably, though conflictingly, Jean Anouilh's famous "Antigone", in 1944, Josephine Baker singing and spying , as well as Sacha Guitry, who was arrested after the Liberation and accused of collaboration without any evidence, but who managed to save a lot of Jewish artists and personalities by playing double agent, or good ol' Sartre (who hilariously makes a cameo later on in the show) who writes a lot of stuff between '40 and' 44. Anyway. There's more but I ain't have time right now to do serious research. Back to Louis.

- [Louis] "'I wanna say something to you. I don't need to hear anything back I just need you to hear me. Hard words and soft words. The hard. Our life is shit. It's been shit. It is shit. It's gonna be shit again. Stop feeling sorry for yourself. No one's watching, no one cares. A shit life beats no life. But where we're going now we can't be running away again. Doesn't mean we forget what we saw. What she did in front of us. I see you going that way I'm gonna pull you back. I don't need that from you. As long as you walk the Earth, I'll never taste the fire, you understand me? We're going to find others like us. Aind if it ain't here, cos life is shit, or I fuck it up again, or you fuck it up, we'll go to the next place. We can't be the only good ones out there. Soft words. If you were the last vampire on Earth... it would be enough. It's you and me. Me and you. You and me. Me and you. You and me.'"

And my hallucination of your dead father.

Anyway that's his child, that's her parent.

Gotta give it to Louis tho, he doesn't lie. Embellishes, obfuscates, but lying, no. As long as Claudia's alive, he's not gonna try the sun. But if she dies... All bets are off.

Also Louis is right and hey, actually needed to hear that right now, thanks bae. Now someone needs to tell him back his own words, I think he needs to hear it back.

Episode insider:

Jacob talking about the heart full of sugar and how he spent the rest of the night on a sugar high is so adorable and hilarious when the part that comes next is Dreamstat. Also hey, "Dreamstat" was coined by Jacob himself, nice!

[Jacob] "Anne Rice's vampires are so human. This is kind of a departure from these sort of beautified, glamorous vampires. It's just really fun." - yeah, I like the glam vamp, but the monstrous vampire, a bit like Mike Flanagan does in Midnight Mass, is also a thrill.

Love Delainey saying she loved doing her stunts and all the physical stuff!

[Assad] "Armand wants to protect himself, but also wants to protect his relationship with Louis, what they have. He feels he has no choice except to come in, sharing the narrative with Louis." - yep. Protecting himself. Protecting what he has with Louis, even at the expanse of Louis' own will. Because what does Armand fear above all else? To be unloved. Not necessarily alone, like most vampires, but to be considered unlovable and unworthy of people's care. So if he can't be sure that people's feelings for him are genuine, he will orchestrate and manipulate them to tie them to himself. That's Armand's schtick.

season 1 masterpost

part 1 | part 2 | part 3

episode 2 | episode 3 | episode 4 | episode 5 | episode 6 | episode 7 | episode 8

[aois-amaterasu-painting]

Black B- PASS- Special Issue - The GazettE - NINTH Reference book - (part 1 - the 5 members solo interviews)

■ Interviewer: The title "NINTH" is quite simple, which is unexpected for a the GazettE album. Delving deeper, there are various meanings that the number "9" can imply...

RUKI: There might be some underlying meanings (laughs). But for this album, it’s simply just that.

■ Interviewer: Right, I see (laughs). The album doesn't have a unified musical direction, but there are strong emotions throughout. To put it simply, it's a strong feeling of 'We are not dead yet, and we can't afford to die.' Do you think that's a strong sentiment in this album?

RUKI: It's hard to explain in one word... I think a lot of different thoughts come together to form that kind of message. How should I put it. While I'm expressing all of myself, the lyrics overall might have a stronger negative aspect. However, the last track, "UNFINISHED," is relatively more positive.

■ Interviewer: Certainly. The straightforward words in that track were quite surprising.

RUKI: Yes, I wrote it honestly... Not that the other songs aren't honest, but I wanted to make it unembellished.

■ Interviewer: The phrase "You are the light that illuminates the path" was very moving and shocking in its naked honesty.

RUKI: Yes... recently, I haven't used such expressions... indeed.

■ Interviewer: Was there something specific that made you write like this at this time?

RUKI: The timing of making the songs and writing the lyrics was during a very negative period. Usually, I don’t write very positively, but I had a lot of thoughts about myself... I was quite at my limit. So maybe, on the contrary, I found salvation in the songs.

■ Interviewer: Despite everything, you could write these lyrics because you had someone to believe in, and your thoughts turned to continuing your activities towards the future, is that right?

RUKI: Yeah, that's right. But at the time I was writing the lyrics, I was wondering why I was putting myself through such pain… It was that kind of negativity. Revisiting those emotions at this point and reflecting on them again… The peak of it was around "itan" (referring to the series of live performances titled "Boudouku Gudon no Sakura" with the initial concept of Dainippon Itan Geisha). The period right after "DOGMA" ended was the lowest, and it feels like that has continued ever since… It's not as serious as it sounds (laughs). This is just my personal perspective.

■ Interviewer: I see. For example, in "NINTH ODD SMELL," there are specific words scattered throughout that trace the history of the GazettE.

RUKI: The way I wrote the lyrics is similar to "DIM SCENE," which was a song that sang about the album itself. But indeed, "NINTH ODD SMELL" depicts everything from our first album to the present.

■ Interviewer: Writing about the band's history in this way, at this time...

RUKI: It was probably because of "itan." After creating something like "DOGMA," I suggested doing "itan," but I'm usually the type not to touch on the past.

■ Interviewer: Yes, that's true.

RUKI: But I deliberately brought it out... How should I put it... I turned it into a product. I always said I wouldn't do that, but I did. In hindsight, I'm glad we did "itan," and I have no regrets about it, but it changed from the ideal I initially had for myself. The negative feelings about that were overwhelming. To put it bluntly, I did something completely opposite to my 'DOGMA' self, I'm not sure if I can say I was in a state of depression, but I felt like I couldn't see the way forward. I couldn't think of anything that would please the fans more than this, and seeing everyone happy about it made it worse. Even though I should have known better, in retrospect, I had this feeling of "Oh, I've done it."

■ Interviewer: It was indeed a significant event, like breaking a forbidden seal.

RUKI: Yes. That's why I remained in that state until I wrote "Falling." Maybe I overthought it, but it was something I had carefully protected, so I had a lot of thoughts about it. That was the trigger that made me start thinking about various things.

■ Interviewer: Did looking back on the past in "NINTH ODD SMELL" mean you had come to terms with it?

RUKI: No, I had already found closure with "Falling." I intended for "Falling" to be a song where I accept both my past and present self and fall... The lyrics reflect that. Saying I accepted it might not be quite right. The idea that even the parts of myself I dislike exist is a fundamental concept in this album. So, it's not that I dislike the songs or the world of "itan." But there were many parts that I thought shouldn't be, which I had sealed away. This time, I included everything in me… melodies, lyrics, without caring about good or bad. I had the intention to unleash what came to my mind without any restrictions."

■ Interviewer: You removed all boundaries and embraced yourself from any era.

RUKI: So, it's a bit different from the term "returning to the roots," but when I released what was still within me, it took this shape. The lyrics for "NINTH ODD SMELL" flowed quite smoothly, and in a sense, it was the first song for me. After falling with "Falling," "NINTH ODD SMELL" begins.

■ Interviewer: I see. That makes sense why "Falling" was released first.

RUKI: Yes, that's why "Falling" was released first.

■ Interviewer: Ah, that makes perfect sense.

RUKI: Oh, really? I'm glad (laughs). "Falling" is often thought of as a love song. I've also been told it sounds like it's about the fans. But I've already unraveled that before, so the way it sounds is different now.

■ Interviewer: Did you have any anxiety about exposing the emotions inside you without restrictions?

RUKI: Not anymore. Once I decided to reveal myself, my emotions swayed a lot, but I decided to express those swaying emotions as well. So, it was tough (laughs). I expressed what I felt was good, without worrying too much about "DOGMA" or previous works. I just wanted to release everything I had.

■ Interviewer: Did you share those core feelings with the members while making this album?

RUKI: No, I didn't. We generally don't have those kinds of discussions.

■ Interviewer: I see. Regarding the musical aspects, songs like "Uragiru Bero" and "UNFINISHED" might feel fresh to those who have only known the recent the GazettE, while they might evoke nostalgia for those who have followed you from the beginning. Of course, all of them are updated to the current the GazettE's style.

RUKI: Yes. The songs came about naturally. By the way, with "UNFINISHED," I found myself becoming negative while writing it. My mood would drop, and I'd feel like I couldn't finish the lyrics, so I'd take a break and come back to it. I realized how deeply I could get lost in thought.

■ Interviewer: The future-oriented lyrics of "UNFINISHED" seem to have been drawn out by the song itself.

RUKI: That's why that song was created when my mood was more positive. It was one of the earlier songs we made.

■ Interviewer: I see. And the opening track "Falling" and the final track "UNFINISHED" seem to have a direct connection in terms of the lyrical flow.

RUKI: Yes. For me, it's the beginning and the end... or rather, what comes after the end.

■ Interviewer: You fall in "Falling," but it's not the end. In "UNFINISHED," you take someone's hand and walk toward the future.

RUKI: It wasn't made with that much thought. It's just the result of expressing everything I felt. That's why I still can't view it objectively, from a third-party perspective. The lyrics are part of me.

■ Interviewer: So the words here aren't emotions you can yet see from a distance.

RUKI: There are some songs I can see that way, but most of them, no.

■ Interviewer: How long did it take to write the lyrics after "Falling"?

RUKI: About a month, I think. It was faster than usual. During that time, I wrote about what I felt while reflecting on myself, including my emotional fluctuations.

■ Interviewer: As we discussed earlier, by shaping your fluctuating emotions into a piece of work, did you experience any changes within yourself?

RUKI: Hmm... changes... I'm not sure.

■ Interviewer: Did you feel a sense of completion?

RUKI: Yes, perhaps. I pushed myself to my limits, so it was tough, but I felt like I had given everything, almost like I had poured my life into it.

■ Interviewer: But as a vocalist, you'll continue singing these songs moving forward, right?

RUKI: Yes, that's right.

■ Interviewer: How does that feel? Is it like purifying your emotions through singing?

RUKI: Ideally, that's what I'd like it to be. Time plays a part in it too. During this production period, I realized that I can't write about things I don't genuinely feel. I can't lie in my lyrics; they can't be business-like (laughs).

■ Interviewer: (Laughs) You can't write fictional, imaginary stories.

RUKI: It's fine if fans interpret it that way. But when I'm writing, I can't write about things I don't feel. For example, if I'm not thinking about the fans at a particular time, I can't write lyrics that seem like I am, hypothetically speaking. If my feelings change halfway through writing, I scrap it and start over.

■ Interviewer: That's why lyrics that you wrote with the fans in mind probably come across as straightforward and real.

RUKI: I'd like to think so. That's why I avoid giving specific explanations about the lyrics to prevent giving preconceived notions. I didn't like it when artists I liked explained their lyrics in detail. But then, it wouldn't be an interview (laughs).

■ Interviewer: I hope to ask in a way that works well (laughs).

RUKI: I don't intend to write in a twisted way, but it's challenging. For example, even with anger, the intensity of the emotion might differ from just being "annoyed." Especially with "DOGMA," the emotions were intense. Even now, talking about lyrics tends to pull me back into those feelings.

■ Interviewer: I see... it was that deep.

RUKI: It's not a bad thing. During this interview period, I've been feeling that way constantly, but it's not like I'm unwell (laughs). It's probably good to have that side. But with older songs, I can't always recall my feelings from that time. There are songs where I wanted listeners to feel a certain way, such as wistful or sorrowful.

■ Interviewer: So there are lyrics that were written with a specific intention.

RUKI: Some older songs have that. But they are just songs. It's not that I deny them, but when I think about my feelings when I was younger, I feel that I need to acknowledge them, or it becomes painful. There might have been such emotions.

■ Interviewer: Because it's a piece of work.

RUKI: Yes. However, with recent works, listening to them brings back my real feelings from that time vividly. I think that's a good thing for me as a vocalist.

■ Interviewer: To put it simply, the emotions embedded naturally become stronger, making it an even more emotional song.

RUKI: Exactly. I think it's much better than becoming numb (laughs).

■ Interviewer: Rather than just tracing the lyrics.

RUKI: Yes. Although, this can make it a bit dark. Fans who read the interviews get worried. But from an outsider's perspective, band members might think, "Do you really feel that deeply?" I suppose we're more delicate than expected.

■ Interviewer: Also, the charm of print media is that it can convey those real backgrounds and feelings in detail, enhancing what you feel when listening to the work. In the band interviews, the word "natural" was mentioned, but for lyrics, it's not just about that...

RUKI: It's about human touch, I guess.

■ Interviewer: I think so too. The arrangement of the songs gives the impression that the live performance could be completed as it is.

RUKI: From the selection stage, we progressed by filling gaps. We considered what was missing or what we wanted, so it has been in this form from the beginning. So, I think that's why.

■ Interviewer: Did you foresee starting with "Falling" after the SE and ending with "UNFINISHED"?

RUKI: Yes, that's what we aimed for. Also, I think that just listening to "UNFINISHED," the cover art might not quite match (laughs). By the way, "UNFINISHED" was completed around dawn.

■ Interviewer: The environment might also influence the style of the song. Since this song ends with a fade-out, it should conclude in a new form during live performances. I hope it will grow like "TOMORROW NEVER DIES."

RUKI: We didn't intend for "TOMORROW NEVER DIES" to be like that at the time, but it was completed quickly. It might naturally evolve or eventually fade away and stop being performed. However, songs that are born so quickly often have long lifespans.

■ Interviewer: It's not about creating a song to be a touching piece for live performances.

RUKI: Also, I can't create songs with that intention. It would feel like a farce to me. The same goes for live performances. For example, we stopped playing "Miseinen" because it felt like I had to cry every time, even if that wasn't the case. Similarly, we don't play "Wakaremichi" even though we could. For instance, during our 10th-anniversary live, we didn't play it because we said we wouldn't until we disbanded. We're stubborn that way.

■ Interviewer: Is it largely because these are some of the band's earliest songs?

RUKI: No, I don't have any resistance to the songs themselves. I had no issue performing "Sentimental na onigokko." It's not that I dislike them. I just feel they’re a bit youthful. So, I didn't intend to release "Itan" as a standalone video work.

■ Interviewer: I see. Listening to what you've said, it feels meaningful that the live footage of "Boudouku Gudon no Sakura" is included in the "NINTH" LIMITED EDITION BOX.

RUKI: It connects in a way and can be seen in a different light. Including it shows a change in me. It doesn’t fit the world of "NINTH" at all, and I used to be adamant about not including unrelated content, no matter how well it might sell.

■ Interviewer: This is a big change.

RUKI: Yeah... it's not that serious of a topic, though.

■ Interviewer: No, it's natural to have non-negotiable aspects as an artist, especially in a band like the GazettE that has moved forward in its own way.

RUKI: For me, it's not about scolding myself but allowing myself to be seen that way. It's about accepting even the uncool parts of myself. That's why I haven't watched the "Itan" footage even once.

■ Interviewer: Really, you haven't?

RUKI: Usually, the MC parts are edited out, but this time they're included. I barely watched the opening part shown at the "BURST INTO A BLAZE 3" event. I left it untouched, letting it be.

■ Interviewer: It's surprising that you didn't watch the footage even once before it became a product.

RUKI: If I had watched it, I would have easily cut the MC parts (laughs). When we decided to include it in "NINTH," we were already planning to leave the MC uncut, so I thought it was better not to watch. It's not that I hate including the MC parts; I just dislike the act of watching myself in that footage. The visuals and singing are fine, so it's just a matter of mindset.

■ Interviewer: Thinking about it that way, it feels like it has become something even more special.

RUKI: Yes. Now, it has a lot of meaning.

■ Interviewer: The lyrics also reflect your genuine emotions without any disguise, and your time with "Dainippon Itan Geisha" played a part in that...

RUKI: That's also part of me. In the past, I didn't acknowledge that. I used to separate it, like, "That was then, and this is now." I didn't deny my past, but I considered it a separate entity. However, when I reflect on my feelings from when I was younger, I realize it would be painful not to acknowledge them. So, I may have had such emotions. But I hear that vocalists often have such feelings to some extent. Some people are even uncomfortable with their own lyrics. Believing that the present is the best and affirming myself, I've moved forward. While creating the ninth album as RUKI, I decided to expose all my ugly and weak parts. For this ninth work, I wanted to express whatever feelings I had, no matter what they were.

■ Interviewer: I see. There are many aspects that become clear only through such discussions.

RUKI: Yes, although there are parts that you probably don’t need to know.

■ Interviewer: However, knowing the author's thoughts can change the perceived intensity and the depicted scenery.

RUKI: Well, I’m usually in good spirits (laughs). When I talk about these things, the members often say, "What!?" But it's a personal thing.

■ Interviewer: I'm glad to know that this work carries such profound feelings.

RUKI: It’s heavy though (laughs).

■ Interviewer: But it's much better than someone who doesn’t think about anything at all.

RUKI: I used to think I was a person who didn’t think about anything. I was more of a positive thinker. So, it was shocking. I had never fallen this deep before.

■ Interviewer: If you hadn’t done a live under the name "Dainippon Itan Geisha," things might have turned out differently.

RUKI: Most likely, it would still be somewhat "DOGMA"-like. Not that I would have wanted to continue with the sound of "DOGMA" indefinitely. We did it so thoroughly that I was exhausted. If I wanted to make music like that, we already have the "DOGMA" songs. Of course, doing "Itan" didn’t directly lead to the melodies in "NINTH."

■ Interviewer: Right. The direction of your mindset would have been different.

RUKI: Exactly. So, it's somewhat mysterious that we ended up with this kind of album now.

■ Interviewer: Around the time of the release of your previous work "DOGMA," the GazettE had many opportunities to look back on the journey you've taken, such as the "Redefinition Tour," the 13th Anniversary live, and the 15th Anniversary live. What was your mindset before starting the album's production?

Uruha: Really, in these past few years, we've had many projects that involved looking back. Besides what you just mentioned, we also made a ballad best-of album ("TRACES VOL.2," released on March 8, 2017). Reflecting on so much made me realize that I've always been immature as a musician and that I'm still incomplete. Especially when I think about my mindset as a guitarist in the early days, it's at a level where I don't even want to remember it (laughs). The past few years of reflecting have been a period for me to realize that I need to improve more."

■ Interviewer: Your dedication remains unchanged. Amidst such thoughts, you began creating "NINTH," right?

Uruha: Yes. But at that time, we didn't have a clear theme or concept for the album. It was the same with "DOGMA" – RUKI just presented the visual image. This time, it was a picture of a soldier’s face melting, but I couldn't visualize how that would connect musically. In other words, there was no theme or direction when we started making the songs. Having just come out of a period of intense reflection on the past, I personally approached the songwriting process with the question, "Who am I?" in mind. When you keep pushing forward without looking back, sometimes you end up with something that doesn't feel like yourself. I thought that wasn’t good, and if I got too immersed in my current mode, I might overlook my own immaturity. So this time, I wanted to create songs that reflected my core. In that sense, the period of looking back was beneficial.

■ Interviewer: You took a good look at yourself. Listening to the songs you wrote this time, "THE MORTAL" and "BABYLON'S TABOO," it's clear that you like powerful and emotional music.

Uruha: That's definitely true. However, I brought those two songs in fairly late in the production process. So, they weren't born out of the initial inspiration but were created while looking at the trends of the other songs that were already finished. Especially "BABYLON'S TABOO," which was made towards the very end."

■ Interviewer: I see. Let’s start with talking about "THE MORTAL." This song is impressive for its method of utilizing the contrast between heaviness and a sense of floating, as well as its chorus that combines strength and sadness.

Uruha: "While we didn’t have a clear vision of what we wanted the album "NINTH" to be, we all agreed through the production process that an emotional sound is cool. This is important not only in live performances but also in our overall expression. Having that kind of emotional intensity can be a weapon when performing at festivals and such. Bands that lack this intensity don't seem cool to me. It's quite challenging to bring out this intensity, but we wanted to cherish that aspect. We didn’t explicitly decide to go in that direction during meetings, but when we watched live footage together, comments like 'This staging is intense and great' or 'It's emotional' came up often, and that became a sort of positive feedback loop. With that in mind, I created "THE MORTAL" very consciously following that trend."

■ Interviewer: I think many listeners perceive the GazettE as an emotional band. This time, you were especially conscious of that, right?

Uruha: "Yes. There are many bands outside of the visual kei field that have this emotional aspect. Since there are so many, it means there are many listeners who appreciate that style. Also, the emotional quality of visual kei has its own unique appeal, and I feel it's necessary for the GazettE to aim for that. After "DOGMA," I thought that the next thing we should seek is that kind of emotional quality."

■ Interviewer: Indeed, as you gain more experience, your ability to express "wabi-sabi" (aesthetic of beauty in imperfection) increases. When you are young, even if you want to be emotional, it's hard to express it well.

Uruha: "It’s hard to express. For example, there's a certain coolness in being subtle rather than expressing something strongly. If that's not cool, even emphasized expressions become superficial. Although I understood this, I couldn't achieve it well in the past. Either I couldn't be subtle enough, or I became too subdued and boring (laughs). Recently, I feel the urge to refine that contrast even more."

■ Interviewer: It's inspiring to see that with ambition, one can continue to evolve even after 10 or 15 years.

Uruha: "Yes. Now, more than ever, I feel like I've truly found joy. In the early days of the GazettE, it wasn’t as fun as it is now. Back then, I was just playing guitar with all my might, and the only fun part was being in a band. Now, expressing myself through the guitar is enjoyable, and when I can enjoy that, I can enjoy anything."

■ Interviewer: Over a long period, you understand many things. Additionally, the GazettE itself continues to evolve and change, leading to many discoveries.

Uruha: "Through the activities of the GazettE, many doors within myself have opened. The GazettE never stays in one place. The members enjoy discovering new things by challenging themselves, which is why not being satisfied is important. Also, looking back at the GazettE’s history helped me identify my flaws. My uncool aspects (laughs). By examining my roots, I see where I’ve carried that tackiness to my current self (laughs). If I don’t understand that, I can’t get rid of it."

■ Interviewer: But, the parts you feel are negative might be attractive to others.

Uruha: "That could be true. However, I think I should meet my own standards. Instead of using the word 'personality' as an excuse, I want to confront it properly."

■ Interviewer: That sounds like you. We got a bit sidetracked, but could you talk about the other song, "BABYLON'S TABOO"?

Uruha: "In GazettE's live shows, there's always a ballad block. This song was made as a transition piece to return to the intense zone from that ballad block. So, I thought it would be good to have a song that is continuous and elusive, like a one-chord song. "BABYLON'S TABOO" was created because I wanted a complex song that requires various skills to express."

■ Interviewer: Indeed, it turned out to be just that. It also has a subtle ethnic flavor, and it's nice that it's not too obvious.

Uruha: "That’s because the underlying concept wasn’t to bring out that world view. With this kind of musical style, it’s common to use Middle Eastern scales or incorporate sitars, but that’s not where I wanted to go. When I shaped what was inside me, it turned into this kind of song."

■ Interviewer: The continuous guitar riff and congas create a subtle native music feel. The fact that the congas aren’t overly emphasized is also great.

Uruha: "That's hindsight though. Initially, the conga was produced at the same level as the drums, but during the mixing stage, I thought it would be cooler to emphasize the sound of the drum toms. I decided to prioritize downgrading the sequences, thinking they were secondary. This time, I wanted to focus more on the band. Instead of emphasizing the sequence's impression in terms of development, I wanted to showcase the band's pulling power and didn't aim to strengthen the sequence's impact."

■ Interviewer: This work has a stronger band feel, but it’s characterized by songs with a solid worldview, not just driven by momentum or groove.

Uruha: "This time, we were extremely strict in our song selection. It took a while to finalize the selection. We kept creating songs, thinking there must be more, and we meticulously selected the ones we truly believed were the best."

■ Interviewer: The songs are compact and dense, matching the recent trends in the music scene.

Uruha: "It wasn’t intentional; it just happened naturally. Even if the structure is elaborate, we didn’t want long songs. Also, the overall BPM (tempo) feels fast, resulting in many songs around three and a half minutes long."

■ Interviewer: The fact that it happened naturally indicates a sensitivity to the times. Let's talk about the guitar next. What was important for you in terms of the guitar in this production?

Uruha: "We started the production with "Falling." First, we recorded "Falling" and decided to release it digitally. We spent a long time on the pre-production for "Falling," knowing it would set the tone for the album. There was significant debate about the direction we should take. Each member had their own ideas and desires, and when we combined them, it turned out to be too distorted. It was quite challenging to figure out the band’s sound. We used various references to guide us."

■ Interviewer: What direction did you initially want to take?

Uruha: "I originally preferred analog and had always used amps. However, while making "DIVISION" and "DOGMA," I realized that my personal aesthetics and desires as a guitarist didn’t always align with the band's sound. If it didn’t fit the band, it was meaningless. So, I considered what would suit the band and found that the things I had dismissed were actually the right answer. Basically, instead of using amps, I started using simulators to create the sound. Although I had resisted this method, when I tried it with an open mind, it fit well. Initially, I couldn't accept it, so I gradually adopted it. I started with cabinet (amp speaker box) simulators, then tried other things, and my world changed significantly. Things that were difficult before became easier. During live shows, I used to bring my own mics, set up two mics on the cabinet to capture the guitar sound. Despite my efforts, the guitar sound wasn’t heard well from the audience, and it didn’t blend well with the band. I realized I was only thinking I was doing something great without achieving the desired result. The more complex the setup, the less the guitar sound stood out. That led me to go digital."

■ Interviewer: Really? Does that mean the guitar on "NINTH" is mostly line recording?

Uruha: "Yes, not 'mostly,' but entirely line recording."

■ Interviewer: That's... surprising! The guitar on this work has a perfect distance from the ear, not too close nor too far. I thought you had found the ideal microphone arrangement for the cabinet.

Uruha: "That’s not the case. I experimented a lot to get here. Simply switching to digital line recording was really lackluster at first. It was lackluster for a long time. During "DOGMA," I couldn’t decide whether to bring out the amp's qualities or the cabinet simulator feel. But through research, I learned how to overcome the weaknesses of simulation. Now there are various simulators, but you can’t just use them as they are. For instance, I use only the Tube Screamer effect from Line6’s POD, and pair it with a different amp simulator."

■ Interviewer: That’s quite technical (laughs).

Uruha: "Hahaha (laughs). Using multiple simulators required a flexible mindset. For example, the POD has a unique sound; the Tube Screamer effect from POD is different from the real thing. However, that distinctive clinginess is only possible with POD. So, instead of seeing it as a Tube Screamer simulation, I started using it as a drive effect. I believe that if the sound matches my vision, the process doesn’t matter much. During this work, I realized that it's essential to cherish the initial vision for a song. It’s not about what equipment you use but the sound you create."

■ Interviewer: I agree. I think being able to use digital equipment so proficiently comes from all the analog trial and error you went through to get here.

Uruha: "I feel that too. You can’t understand the sound of a real amp unless you’ve actually used one. Even when using digital equipment, in the end, we still seek a sense of authenticity. My current goal is to reach a point where you can’t tell if it’s a simulator or a real amp."

■ Interviewer: The guitar sound on "NINTH" gets very close to that.

Uruha: "I think we got pretty close, but I still feel there's a long way to go. If you don’t feel the paper cone of the speaker vibrating, then it’s not the goal. Mixing and mastering diluted that raw feeling, but the recorded sound was more vivid. So, through this recording process, I learned that it’s necessary to exaggerate certain aspects more."

■ Interviewer: Your dedication to research hasn't changed at all. How about your guitar playing?

Uruha: "The song that was really fun to play was 'BABYLON'S TABOO.' It was full of emotion, and there were times when I played without thinking about anything other than emotion, and I think we recorded a good take. The difficult ones were RUKI’s songs. His riffs are designed by someone who doesn’t play guitar, making them very challenging. They don’t hit the sweet spots that guitarists usually enjoy; they’re quite demanding (laughs). Also, it’s not like he says, ‘I did this casually, make it sound good based on that.’ He wants it just as it is (laughs). So I’d be like, ‘Wait, this part is single notes? I’d use power chords for all of it.’ There’d be weird bends or sudden picking harmonics (laughs). And I’d think, ‘Do I have to do this every time?’ (laughs). RUKI’s songs have a lot of riffs like that, so it took quite a bit of effort to internalize them."

■ Interviewer: So, it's impressive that you don’t say "impossible" to that. In the song written by RUKI, the rough guitar intro of "GUSH" is really cool, isn’t it?

Uruha: "Yeah, that coolness comes from RUKI's strong commitment. I did it quickly on my own and handed it over, but he said the sound quality was different. He wanted it to be more noisy. So I was like, 'Huh, even more?' (laughs). That meant it wasn't just a matter of guitar gain levels anymore; it ended up being crushed with a crusher (an effect that gives strong distortion), like 'There's no choice but to destroy it completely' (laughs). That's how we shaped it."

■ Interviewer: Quite extreme (laughs). The beginning goes punkish, but you're playing mechanical riffs in the interlude, right?

Uruha: "I actually put a lot of effort into those riffs. It had an industrial feel, conveyed only with the image of a whammy (an effect that smoothly changes the pitch of the guitar). RUKI's demo had the guitar going 'wooooon wooooon' only, and he wanted it to sound really good. So I was like, 'Huh?' (laughs). Even with the whammy, the sound just gets lame (laughs). So, after a lot of trial and error, we finally used a ring modulator that produces whammy and octave effects. It's quite simple in terms of what we did, but I think it turned into a riff with a strong impact."

■ Interviewer: That riff has a nuance like a synthesizer, which seems to leverage your use of synths in albums like "DIVISION."

Uruha: "That could be true. Also, when creating sounds for the GazettE's SE, there were many scenes where I destructively broke the sound or made explosive noises. I learned a lot from that, it has expanded my repertoire. Another thing is that stopping recording live amps and doing it through a line allows you to revert when you go too far. That sense of security enables us to boldly try things."

■ Interviewer: From those aspects, one can feel that you've really mastered digital equipment. Another thing, on this album, you handled the mixing for "THE MORTAL," "BABYLON'S TABOO," and also "99.999," right?

Uruha: "Yeah, I started mixing myself because I wanted to figure out how to properly showcase the guitar. If I didn't put myself in the position of an engineer, I couldn't argue or suggest anything to them. There were a lot of things about the mix that I wasn't satisfied with before. Like, I'd think the guitar sound was thin and wanted it thicker, but then they'd say, 'The original recording height...' It was frustrating, you know? I thought, 'I've put in a reasonable amount of effort and used good equipment, so it shouldn't sound thin.' But I lacked knowledge, and it wasn't just about using good equipment. I wanted that assurance, so I decided to mix it myself. However, I've been doing this for quite some time, so it wasn't like I started anew for this album."

■ Interviewer: I see. However, you need knowledge to do mixing work. How did you go about acquiring that?

Uruha: "I'm self-taught. I didn't learn from anyone; I researched and learned on my own. Also, mixing work is somewhat related to creating guitar sounds, so it's similar in feeling. There's a desire to improve the band's sound. So, rather than a major decision, it feels like an extension of creating guitar sounds."

■ Interviewer: You can tell you're a genuine music lover. So, what do you focus on and value when mixing your own tracks?

Uruha: "During this work, I realized that when I mix my own songs, I need to cherish the initial feeling of 'I want this song to be like this' that I had when I first created it. I absolutely hate it when it changes midway and I end up thinking, 'Wait, what kind of song did I want to make again?' I wanted to protect that initial impulse, at least for my own songs. Ultimately, when making a piece of work, the skill of an engineer can greatly influence and change it, sometimes against my wishes. So, I focused on preserving the original feeling when I made the song."

■ Interviewer: I think that's something listeners will really appreciate.

Uruha: "It's the same with live performances—when the PA gets involved, the members' intentions don't always get conveyed accurately. Even if we want to balance things well, sometimes the audience hears it in a skewed way because the PA is working to make their job easier. It’s better if the band can shape the sound themselves. If we understand the difficulty of achieving a good balance live, that's just part of the process. I wanted to know more about these aspects."

■ Interviewer: It seems like your mixes will keep improving. Now, "NINTH" has become an album showcasing new charms of the GazettE. Along with the album release, we’re also looking forward to the tour starting in July.

Uruha: "The album 'NINTH' is a work designed for the tour, packed with things we want to do live. As I mentioned before, it's about bringing out that emotional aspect. I have a clear vision for this kind of live performance, so I think we can start the tour on a strong note. With 'DOGMA,' the goal was to present the image of 'DOGMA' on tour, focusing on what the GazettE would do rather than on myself. This time, I can concentrate on what I want to do individually and what I want to show as a guitarist. I'm really looking forward to delivering that kind of live performance."

■ Interviewer: Around the release of your previous album "DOGMA," the GazettE had many opportunities to reflect on its journey with the "Redefinition tour," the 13th-anniversary live, and the 15th-anniversary live. Did this influence how you felt before starting the new album?

Aoi: "It was quite natural. Looking back at the past, I didn't have a moment where I thought, 'Yes, I'm definitely this kind of guitarist.' Even during the 'redefinition' phase, it wasn't so much about how I was back then but more about the songs and the youthfulness of the band. In that context, I was always working as my current self at the time, so there's no consistent style."

■ Interviewer: So, it's more about providing what the songs and the band need rather than asserting your own style?

Aoi: "Especially recently, yes. Although the other members are like that too, in the past, I was more intense (laughs). I had a strong attachment to staging, certain things were absolutely non-negotiable. Nowadays, we focus more on how to present ourselves as a band rather than as individuals. So, both in staging and playing, I've become more flexible. However, this doesn't mean I can't do what I want. I enjoy various approaches and playing styles. Playing heavy riffs is fun, and so is using crunch tones to bring out the chords. There’s nothing I don’t want to do style-wise. So, I really enjoy playing guitar in the GazettE. Long-time fans might think Aoi has become more subdued lately, but I feel more naturally part of the band now."

■ Interviewer: In long-lasting bands, members often find the right position for themselves. With this mindset, what were your thoughts going into the creation of "NINTH"?

Aoi: "When I listened to the submitted songs, I thought there was a lot of variety again. There were heavy songs, and delicate ones like the seventh track, 'その声は脆く' (Sonokoe wa Moroku). I wasn't confused by the variety; I felt ready to handle any song. I’ve always been something of a jack-of-all-trades, even outside of music (laughs)."

■ Interviewer: Really? I don't see it that way.

Aoi: "Is that so? I feel I can't dive deep into things. Uruha, for example, dives headfirst into things and steadily improves, but I'm not like that."

■ Interviewer: I don't think being versatile is the same as being a jack of all trades. You have your own style, and you're the type who can apply it in various situations, right?

Aoi: "True, I have a core, but everything else is quite broad and shallow (laughs). As a trade-off, though, I can adapt to almost anything. Lately, all the members have become capable of playing guitar, so during the demo stage, the phrases are often already solidified. Still, I make sure to assert myself with the guitar phrases. If I think the demo's guitar phrase is good, I'll reproduce it, but when I change it, I change it completely. Band cohesion is my top priority, but if I feel it's better to expand the demo phrase or the scene, I'll suggest a broader approach. That’s been my stance recently, and it hasn’t changed this time either."

■ Interviewer: That seems like a good approach. When creating songs for the album, what did you focus on?

Aoi: "This time, we didn’t have a specific concept for the album when we started. With "DOGMA," we had a strong concept from the beginning, aiming to create a work that would become like a scripture. But this time, we didn’t have that. RUKI probably had a vague idea of the album, but it wasn’t solidified enough to put into words. So, at first, we just started making songs individually, and various worldviews emerged. When RUKI mentioned a direction for the songs, it wasn’t a motif like in "DOGMA." It was more like, ‘Let’s proceed with this musical style.’ So, we started creating with just that direction in mind (laughs)."

■ Interviewer: Perhaps RUKI wanted to clarify the overall vision of the album by listening to the submitted songs.

Aoi: "Maybe so. That's why this time it didn't feel like a selection meeting in the traditional sense. It was more about building upon the musical direction Ruki had mentioned and choosing the best among what each of us had written. So, it felt like an audition in a way."

■ Interviewer: So, regarding the song Utsusemi, was it chosen from various songs you made, not something you created with a fixed decision?

Aoi: "Yes. I made many songs and proposed them at each selection meeting, but there wasn’t a direct response like, ‘This song is good.’ RUKI created songs with a vision of wanting this one at the end of the album or this one in the middle. He couldn’t see which songs would connect well. As a result, the songs kept piling up without deciding whether to adopt them or not (laughs)."

■ Interviewer: But in the end, you could choose the best from a rich pool of candidate songs. What was your thought process in writing Utsusemi?

Aoi: "This song was one of those created without a clear answer to the need for a mid-album track. I wrote Utsusemi long before I had a clear vision of "NINTH." I was still exploring how to approach it, so personally, I think the songs I made after Utsusemi are more complete, reflecting the atmosphere of "NINTH." But suddenly, RUKI started saying he thought that song I had brought in at the beginning would fit well, and that's how this song got included. That's all good, but when it came to making 'NINTH,' I had thought to avoid making songs of this type. There’s this perception of ‘this is Aoi's position’ (laughs). Even in interviews, it becomes a topic, and I wanted to avoid that. I always create various types of songs, but they often don’t fit and aren’t adopted. In the end, it turned out to be a song like this again this time (laughs)."

■ Interviewer: That’s because your emotional sense is a significant element of the GazettE. Whether Utsusemi is included or not greatly affects the impression of "NINTH."

Aoi: "I hope so. But honestly, I want people to understand that I don't intend to create songs of this position. This time, I came up with the melody myself, but until now, it was Ruki's melodies, so it was like a collaboration with Ruki. It always ends up in that position, like, 'Huh? Again?' (laughs). I want people to know that I also create intense songs, not just songs like Utsusemi. Please make this sentence bold (laughs)."

■ Interviewer: (laughs). Even if it wasn’t your initial intention, “Utsusemi” is an emotional and melodious mid-tempo tune, a truly great song. It also introduces new elements, such as the use of synth riffs.

Aoi: "For this song, RUKI wanted the chorus to feel soft, so I completely reworked the chorus to match the melody. But apart from that, the demo was almost in its final form. The synth riff was in my head from the moment I created the song. The intro and first verse have the synth and guitar in unison. That’s about which phrases to emphasize. I felt that nothing extra was needed and thought there weren't many examples of synth and guitar unison. So, I made them unison, and for the second verse, I harmonized the guitar and synth."

■ Interviewer: The expansive feel in the second verse is exquisite. The guitar solo flows beautifully and is a highlight.

Aoi: "Really? I feel like I could have done more with the solo if I had more time. I was satisfied when I recorded it, but listening to it now, I think it’s a bit rough."

■ Interviewer: I don’t think it’s rough at all.

Aoi: "No, it’s rough. Maybe I feel that way because it’s my own work. It’s not that it’s bad, but I think I could have polished it a bit more."

■ Interviewer: Including the sexy sound with the octaver, it’s a great solo. Speaking of guitars, let’s talk about the guitars on “NINTH.” Did you have any themes for the guitars this time?

Aoi: "We recorded 'Falling' at the end of last year, ahead of the other songs, which served as a pre-production recording for the album. Initially, I played with a sound in mind for the next step, but that expectation was shattered. In a good way… We understood what the band desired in terms of sound."

■ Interviewer: What kind of sound were you aiming for?

Aoi: "DOGMA had a very modern finish. Personally, I’m not very good with modern guitar sounds, so I wanted to bring it back to my own style. But the band was in a modern sound mode. Making a modern sound is easy, but I didn’t want to do the same thing again. So, I thought I’d propose a sound I had in mind. Although it didn’t make it in time for 'Falling,' I started crafting the sound I envisioned using my equipment. It took shape, but I felt it was a bit forced. Not that I disliked the sound, but in the process of adjusting it with various methods and EQ, I realized it would be better to use equipment that naturally produced that sound."

■ Interviewer: Does that mean you used simulators for direct recording?

Aoi: "No, I used a pretty standard setup in an analog way, playing through a cab (speaker box) and miking it. Uruha, on the other hand, created his sound entirely digitally using simulations. I was concerned about the atmosphere and asked him not to stray too far from it. When one person uses digital and the other uses analog, if we don’t consider each other’s sounds, the balance of the two guitars’ atmospheres can become odd."

■ Interviewer: That’s true. So, did you two align your approaches? The result sounds very natural, as if both guitars were recorded in the same manner.

Aoi: "Maybe, but when we made the ballad best (TRACES VOL.2), Uruha packaged the sound he wanted to create entirely through simulation. The difference in atmosphere was very noticeable. So, I wanted to consolidate the band’s overall atmosphere a bit more if he continued using simulators. Even though we used different methods, we discussed wanting to consolidate the band's ambiance a bit more… That's what I talked about. I think Uruha put a lot of effort into his sound creation this time as well."

■ Interviewer: He mentioned that. Still, I’m a bit surprised. The balance seems well-achieved.

Aoi: "When the digital player moves towards analog and the analog player towards digital, it comes together well (laughs). Neither the two guitarists nor the band consciously tried to match the sounds this time. Each of us thought about our own sound, considering how the band would ultimately be heard. Being analog, I lacked the closeness in sound that digital provides. Analog has a sense of space, while digital’s closeness is hard to replicate. Knowing Uruha’s sound would stick to the ears, I aimed for a sound as close to the ear as possible. I insisted on analog because I believe it offers a different power compared to purely digital processing. I wanted to package the feel of air vibrating from the cab. But I didn’t want the digital closeness to overpower the phrases either. That was a conflict, but Uruha left space for both guitars to be heard, which allowed us to blend them well."

■ Interviewer: The proximity of the guitars is perfect. You can clearly hear the nuances of the guitar.

Aoi: "This album feels very raw. 'DOGMA' made the sounds of both of us quite similar, and the album had a lot of mechanical processing to synchronize unison riffs. That was suitable for the world view of 'DOGMA,' but when it came time to create something true to ourselves this time, I thought this kind of roughness was good. After all, it's something humans do, and each person values different aspects of the sound. Packaging that again at this timing is significant for the band. If we erased our individualities, the work would become boring. I believe a band creates something unexpectedly great by clashing individualities."

■ Interviewer: I agree. The advancement of equipment has created an environment where different approaches can be utilized effectively. In the past, you would have been forced to align our methods.

Aoi: "That's right. If one of us had said they wanted to go digital, we would have ended up both going digital for the sake of research. But this time, we didn't do that at all, and I was able to work on my sound independently for the first time in a while. Previously, there was always someone in the studio because we were bringing the two guitars together. But this time, everyone was gone (laughs). REITA, for instance, would say, 'I'm done recording my bass, so I'll take off,' and he’d leave (laughs). He would record his bass from the morning and leave around the best time in the afternoon. I would start when it got dark, just when I wanted to go home (laughs). And I’d be alone (laughs). Recording guitars that way and still managing to bring them together nicely in the end is only possible in this day and age. It would have been impossible in the past, I think."

■ Interviewer: I agree. So, what equipment did you use for the recording of "NINTH"?

Aoi: "I used my signature model from ESP for the guitar. That guitar has a bit of a sharp sound, or you could say it has an edgy tone. It's not typically the sound the members of the GazettE prefer, but it fit well this time. 'NINTH' really captures the current sound of the five of us, which I think is great. By the way, for the 11th track 'ABHOR GOD,' I used the same Dragonfly guitar as Uruha. Although the amps were different, the tonal range of the two guitars matched. If you listen to 'ABHOR GOD' compared to the other tracks knowing that, you'll notice how unified the guitar tones are."

■Interviewer: That’s definitely something to check out. What kind of amps did you use?

Aoi: "When we were recording 'Falling', I talked with the engineer about wanting that kind of sound, so we decided to use the 5150. Marshall amps have a strong high end, so we thought the 5150, with its rich mids, would be better. We rented one to try it out and it sounded great, so we decided to use it. Then, the engineer ended up buying a 5150 (laughs). He said, 'There was a cheap used one available, so I bought it.' We ended up with about three 5150s: an older model, a current one, and a slightly modified one. I liked the early model 5150 the best for its rawness. I don't dislike the modern sound of the current model; it fits better for ballads and vocal songs. But for aggressive tracks, I used the old 5150. So, I mainly used my guitar, and just a few compact effects."

■ Interviewer: You managed to cover a wide range of styles and approaches with simple equipment. How was the guitar playing aspect?

Aoi: "Since many of the songs were written by others, it was overall quite challenging (laughs). Especially the riff work. It's difficult when non-guitarists create riffs. Also, when recording the riffs, I did a lot of punching in (recording in sections), which made playing them through difficult (laughs). The sound would cut off at the punching points, and I’d have to figure out whether the resonance from the previous sound was needed or not. Those things made the riffs challenging."

■ Interviewer: You reproduced the demo riffs faithfully without changing them to suit your style?

Aoi: "I recreated the main riffs. But as I mentioned earlier, it's important to incorporate my own color into the music. So, I first consider what the composer intended with the riff. Does this phrase need to be there or not? I didn't want to remove something they were particular about, which would go against their intent. I carefully thought about these aspects while shaping the phrases. Some parts stayed as in the demo, while others changed. For delicate songs like 'Sonokoe wa Moroku', I wanted to showcase my style. I was particular about those songs, as well as 'Utsusemi. I remember paying close attention to the details."

■ Interviewer: Songs like 'Sonokoe wa Moroku, 'Utsusemi', and 'UNFINISHED' have a precise approach and the guitar's gain (distortion) is just right.

Aoi: "I was very particular about that. Heavy songs are simpler (laughs). It's like, if that song is like this, then this song should be like this too (laughs). But those three songs were seriously meticulous. I hope readers of this interview keep that in mind while listening."

■ Interviewer: You can enjoy not only the solid and heavy guitar sound but also the light guitar charm and the pleasant resonance of the chords. How do you feel now that 'NINTH' is complete?

Aoi: "I really feel relieved that we finished it (laughs). The schedule was cutting it really close, especially in the latter half of the production."

■ Interviewer: Really? But I thought you reduced the number of live performances last year to focus on making the album...

Aoi: "Well, we did start early and made proper progress, but our dear RUKI is the type who, if he has time, wants to obsess over every detail (laughs). So no matter how much time we have, it always ends up being right up to the deadline. But that’s because of his strong sense of responsibility towards the band, so I can’t really tell him to hurry up. It’s like, ‘I’ll wait for you, really’ (laughs)."

■ Interviewer: I see (laughs). What was your impression when you listened to the finished album, considering all that thrill?

Aoi: "I listened to the album in full for the first time during mastering, and as expected, I passed out (laughs). We worked from the day before until midday the next day, and went straight into mastering, so I blacked out (laughs). The next day, I listened to it carefully and, compared to 'DOGMA,' there are some rough parts, but I felt that added to its humanity. It really captured our current, real selves, and I enjoyed listening to it a lot. The excitement I felt was greater than with our last few works. And you know, 'NINTH' is like, 'We're satisfied with it, now what do you all think?' kind of album. It's not like 'Listen to this great album!' It's more like 'This is us, what do you think?' kind of vibe. We've been doing the GazettE for 16 years now, and I think that's just fine."

■ Interviewer: I'm sure the listeners will feel that excitement too. I'm also looking forward to the tour with 'NINTH'.

Aoi: "'DOGMA' was artistic, with a vibe of 'This is our worldview, please listen!' But 'NINTH' shows our real, down-to-earth selves, so I think the live atmosphere will be quite different. The last tour had a strong theatrical element, but I think this tour will be full of live energy. That's the feeling I get, but because we're the GazettE (laughs), you never know until you open the lid. Maybe we won't know until the second day after the first day of the tour (laughs). It was exactly like that with 'DOGMA' (laughs). So, I don’t know what the tour will be like, but I have a good feeling we’ll put on great shows, so I hope everyone looks forward to it."

■ Interviewer: First, I’d like to ask about your approach to the songs on "NINTH." You add accents depending on the style of the song, but do you generally take a position that supports the bottom without standing out too much?

Reita: "Yes, that’s right. I’ve been that kind of bassist for about ten years now. I do move around at key points, but I think that’s what the bass should do. If it were a one-guitar setup, it might have been different. Plus, our vocalist uses a lot of words, and often includes choruses during interludes, I generally play to let other parts shine more. I want to be in the best shape for the song, and if I play with the feeling of wanting to hear my own phrases, I feel like the band wouldn't last long (laughs)."

■ Interviewer: I see (laughs). From the demo stage, do the other members incorporate the bass line with your style in mind?

Reita: "Sometimes it works out that way, and sometimes they tell me that they want me to move more in certain parts that were initially placeholders. I interpret it in my own way, thinking maybe I should support the bottom here or move around a bit there if there’s space. 'Falling' wasn’t moving in the original song either. It’s not that I particularly want to move the bass line, but I don’t mind moving either (laughs). It’s just about finding a balance where the bass stands out in a good way. Of course, I support the parts where the guitar comes in intricately, and I think I’m doing a good job of finding that balance on my own."

■ Interviewer: In songs like 'Uragiru Bero,' we can hear your driving, standout phrasing.

Reita: "Recently, we’ve been doing a lot of unison playing, but 'Uragiru Bero' incorporates the visual kei sensibility that we’re familiar with. The melody line has a bit of an old-fashioned feel, and RUKI wanted that kind of bass vibe too, so I understood what he meant."

■ Interviewer: It's like blending the nostalgic visual kei elements of yesteryears with the current sense of the GazettE.

Reita: "Yeah. I think those who feel this as nostalgic are probably our generation. Teenagers today probably wouldn't find it nostalgic; they might even feel it's an atmosphere they've never experienced."

■ Interviewer: Are there other songs where you've changed your approach?

Reita: "For example, 'THE MORTAL' and 'BABYLON'S TABOO' had different playing styles, using only the thumb to strike. I'm quietly doing various things, but stealing the listener's ears with the bass isn't my thing."

■ Interviewer: Oh really?

Reita: "Yeah. After all, it's all about the song itself... I'm not looking to have a bass battle (laughs)."

■ Interviewer: However, when REITA was a kid, he was excited by bassists who dazzled with flashy phrasing, right?

Reita: "Yeah, that's right. I wanted to copy them... So I think maybe I'm not the type who kids would idolize now (laughs). But, for example, the cool bands abroad that I like these days, their bass lines hardly move. They often create a mass of unison with guitars, and that's what I feel is 'good sound.' If I were playing something completely different from the guitar in an independent manner, it wouldn't resonate as a cohesive sound, and to me, that wouldn't feel like 'good sound.' So, I try to focus on phrases that contribute to what I perceive as 'good sound.' But the challenging part with the GazettE is that even in unison songs, everyone starts arranging things in the chorus, so creating sound becomes difficult. If it were just unison, feeling the bass would be enough, but when you want to hear the phrases, you start to feel the need for a bit more midrange, and that's the difficulty."

■ Interviewer: Tuning has also become lower.

Reita: "Yeah, that's right. So, sometimes I feel there's a contradiction between the sound I want to produce and the phrases I'm playing."

■ Interviewer: Also, the straightforward 8-beat rush in "UNFINISHED" must resonate with your roots.

Reita: "Yes. But I'm sure 'UNFINISHED,' for example, might feel surprisingly placed here now. I've become part of such a band without even realizing it, but in my mind, it's neither surprising nor anything else—it's right at the heart of our roots."

■ Interviewer: I can picture you vividly playing it live.

Reita: "Yes, so the bass phrase moves only in the last chorus, but originally it moved in the first and second choruses as well. But I imagined how it would look on DVD. It might become a song we play as an encore in five years. Like when we used to play 'Shunsetsu no koro.' In such moments, I want to play while looking around rather than being engrossed in playing during the chorus, so I kept the movement only in the last part."

■ Interviewer: Wow, I didn't expect you to think that far ahead!

Reita: "It was more of a feeling that I wanted to strum a bit more. I hope it becomes a song that holds that kind of position."

■ Interviewer: I wanted to ask if 'UNFINISHED' could become a second 'TOMORROW NEVER DIES' for you.

Reita: "Ah, yes, well (laughs). Who knows."

■ Interviewer: It seems quite challenging to surpass a song that has embedded itself so deeply in your heart and undergone rapid growth.

Reita: "Yes, but we have to surpass them, right? There's a song that made me think, 'I can't win with just what I've built up, I have to compete with what I've stacked up. So, we might have to overwrite the old songs for that. But that depends on the tour. It’s about how much we can nurture it during the tour."

■ Interviewer: Also, 'UNFINISHED' feels like it goes by quickly. It leaves you wanting to hear more.

Reita: "Really? Well, the same goes for live performances; it’s better to end just when people want to see a bit more. You don’t want them looking at the clock. Like with movies, if you start checking how much time is left, that movie becomes a failure for me (laughs). 'UNFINISHED' wasn’t intended to stand out or be in a special position; it’s just one of the 12 tracks we naturally created. It was surprising that people focused on this song so much. It made me realize how dark our band had become (laughs)."

■ Interviewer: Hahaha. Fans who've known the GazettE for a long time would understand that you excel in such songs. You carry the pride of visual kei, but there’s no pressure, right?

Reita: "There wasn’t any. But I do feel relieved that I finally got to do this kind of song, though. Well, in the past, there might have been times when we could have done it but deliberately chose not to. If this kind of song is in every album, the impression might get diluted, you know?"

■ Interviewer: So, when you finally draw your sword, does it feel satisfying?

Reita: "Is it satisfying? Well, I won't know until we do it live… (laughs). If it becomes a song that makes everyone emotional when played at the end of an encore in a few years, that would be great. It's not easy to surpass old songs like 'Shunsetsu no koro' or 'Miseinen.' There's a part of me that wants to perform classic songs like my favorite artists do."

■ Interviewer: But, there is also the example of "TOMORROW NEVER DIES" rising up that high.

Reita: "Yes, that's right. So, in the long run, as I mentioned earlier, if it becomes a song positioned for the last encore someday, by then, I think I can relax and perform it. So, for a while, I'll probably play it cool (laughs)."

■ Interviewer: By the way, there was talk about everyone being in their natural element, so did the songwriting process itself happen quickly?

Reita: "No, at the first song selection meeting, we played the songs and everyone listened and went 'Hmm…' and then fell silent… and then there was 'Should we go home today?' kind of feeling."

■ Interviewer: Scary! I wouldn't want to be there (laughs).

Reita: "We didn't even discuss things like 'Should we do it this way?' Maybe everyone was just troubled. So, it didn't come together clearly from the beginning."

■ Interviewer: So, none of the songs from the initial selection remain?

Reita: "No, there's not a single one. The second time, we brought out 'Falling,' and the other songs came even later. My memory is a bit vague, but 'Falling' is the standard that came out after much deliberation."

■ Interviewer: Considering the history of the GazettE, it was a luxury to let people listen to the opening track of the album for free.

Reita: "That's right. Speaking of luxury, we were able to record just this one song in advance, and we spent many days in the studio for pre-production, trying out different sounds and doing a preliminary recording before the actual recording. We experimented with various sounds by changing the pattern of the bass cabinet and line recording, and playing with different basses. So, making the sound for this album wasn't really that hard."

■ Interviewer: Ah, it was because of that timing.

Reita: "Yes. I think it was possible because we spent plenty of time on 'Falling'."

■ Interviewer: As a result, this method proved effective overall. So, recording the bass went smoothly?

Reita: "I can't say definitively… I was the judge myself, so I listened very carefully. I was looking at the waveforms on the screen, and if the volume dropped even slightly due to rough picking, I would redo it. So, it took more time than usual, but the convenience of re-amping outweighed it. If this were in the past, I would have played repeatedly to tweak the knobs for sound creation, and by the time we were ready to record, my fingers would have been a bit swollen. Eliminating these issues allows for a calm judgment of the sound. Also, recording in two different patterns allows flexibility during mixing if we want to make changes."

■ Interviewer: Isn't it difficult to judge by yourself?

Reita: "Well, basically, I've always been the one to judge. In the end, I would let everyone listen and there would be exchanges like 'Wouldn't it be better to do it this way?' But we didn't have a producer telling us what to do. Since I did it alone, I could listen to just the bass part or only the bass and drums as much as I wanted, so I could be thorough. However, compared to before, it feels less like making an album. For example, after playing in the studio and saying 'It's done!' and calling everyone to the lobby to listen together—that kind of thing isn't there anymore."

■ Interviewer: Certainly, those are the charms of being in a band.

Reita: "Also, from this time, we changed engineers, and it was different from the way we had done it for about seven years, which I think was a good change."

■ Interviewer: It was two external people and Uruha, right?

Reita: "Yes. We couldn't have finished in time otherwise (laughs)."

■ Interviewer: So, the work progressed simultaneously?

Reita: "Yes, really. For the mix, it used to be two songs a day. But on the first day, we had to do four songs a day… But somehow it went quite smoothly."

■Interviewer: You found out you can do it if you try.

Reita: "Yes. And if it goes well, we might have the current engineer handle the live sound as a PA. After all, it's better to have someone who understands the sound we want to produce."

■ Interviewer: Someone who stayed up with you all night and accompanied you extensively (laughs). Almost like being of one mind.

Reita: "Yes (laughs). It feels like we have a similar sense… For example, if I say 'this low part,' it's hard to convey in terms of frequency. But if I say 'the growling part'... When I say those things, our understanding aligns quite well. 'Ah, around here?' 'Yes, exactly,' that kind of quick communication.

■ Interviewer: It seems like you had good chemistry with this engineer.

Reita: "Yes. So with 'Uragiru Bero,' the initial mix didn’t quite capture the bass well, but when the engineer took it back and said, 'I'll tweak it a bit,' the next version he brought back didn’t need any further adjustments. It reaffirmed that our senses were indeed similar."

■ Interviewer: These nuances that can’t be conveyed through frequencies are important. How did you manage that in a process primarily involving data exchange?

Reita: "We used LINE to the fullest (laughs). Among the members, we would communicate in abstract terms like ‘a bit more spread out,’ and I would even send handwritten tab sheets via photo. We didn’t use technical jargon, but everyone could understand it, so I guess we’re in sync with each other."

■ Interviewer: Do you use your smartphone for LINE messages?

Reita: "I use both my smartphone and my computer, but mostly my smartphone."

■ Interviewer: On a side note, isn't it challenging to handle such exchanges on a smartphone?

Reita: "Honestly, I’d love to uninstall LINE (laughs). I actually resent the widespread use of smartphones. You can always be reached by anyone, which I really dislike. There are times when you don’t want to be disturbed and need your own time. On a fundamental level, when the phone rings, it makes me really anxious. But we couldn't avoid using it given the time constraints (laughs)."

■ Interviewer: Right (laughs). But it's really painful to type out lengthy replies on a smartphone when bombarded with questions on LINE.

Reita: "I get that. And then, while typing, you get another message, so you have to start over. It’s annoying. I really wanted us to meet in person. We used to gather every week on a specific day, but this time, due to our tight schedules, we had to handle our tasks individually. However, it was worth it because we didn’t have to compromise, and we achieved a lot."

■ Interviewer: Did your previous experiences help in the video production this time as well?

Reita: "Yes. This time, RUKI and I primarily took the lead in making the 'Falling' MV and the promotional video. The promotional video involved a lot of text and effects, while the MV focused on cutting scenes, so it didn’t require as much skill. However, there were so many scenes that we couldn't fit everything in. It’s better to have too much material than too little, so it was a good problem to have."

■ Interviewer: There have been times when there wasn’t enough material, right?

Reita: "Yeah, it was tough when there wasn’t enough. But this time, we had so much material that we had to decide what to cut, and it was hard because we didn't want to cut anything. As a result, the scenes featuring the members might be a bit fewer, which could leave fans wanting more (laughs). However, I think the quality is the best in the history of the GazettE."

■ Interviewer: Yes. And I couldn’t believe you actually blew up a car.

Reita: "In this day and age, it’s great that we could do something like that."

■ Interviewer: When the staff first mentioned that you were going to destroy a car, I thought, "Are you really that kind of American band?" But after watching the video, I understood.

Reita: "Oh, yes, yes. It’s not like we’re making 'Fast and Furious' or anything (laughs)."

■ Interviewer: I’m glad the nuance came across (laughs).

Reita: "RUKI was also working on it simultaneously. He handled most of the editing, and I helped with the parts he couldn't finish, adjusting colors and fixing the shakiness. We worked on the video for about five days. We even stayed up all night for the final member check. We'll probably be making new videos again soon... but for now, I just want to enjoy the completion of the album."

■ Interviewer: Haha. Regarding the tour setlist, do you plan to follow the flow of this album?

Reita: That’s one way to do it, but since there are slightly fewer songs on this album compared to "DOGMA," we’ll include some older songs. I think they’ll blend in seamlessly. Whether we include songs from "DOGMA" or even older tracks, it shouldn’t feel out of place. This will make selecting the setlist quite challenging. With "DOGMA," it was easier because it was clear which songs fit. This time, with the inclusive nature of "NINTH," it’s a lot more difficult.

■ Interviewer: In a band interview, there was a discussion about whether the audience will participate in the chorus for 'ABHOR GOD.'

Reita: "It might be difficult, but I definitely want them to join in (laughs)."

■ Interviewer: Yes (laughs). Personally, 'BREAK ME' came to mind. With its hand claps and chorus, it seemed like an arena rock number meant for audience participation. But it disappeared from the setlist surprisingly quickly. I imagine the live reaction wasn’t what you expected?

Reita: "Yeah, that was tough. Honestly, I thought 'BREAK ME' would be a killer tune. But when we played it, it was like, "Oh…?" (laughs). It disappeared almost immediately. We even tried to hype it up by releasing black balloons during the second performance, but that backfired. It made us realize we weren’t that kind of band (laughs). So we quickly dropped it. But I still really like "BREAK ME." Some fans do too. It might look different now if we performed it, but it probably won’t happen (laughs).

■ Interviewer: You never know how a song will go over live until you try it.

Reita: "Yeah. I was disappointed too. We gave up on it before it could fully develop. There’s a bit of regret, but we’re determined not to let that happen with the new songs.

■ Interviewer: With such a wide range of content, I’m excited to see how each song will unfold live.

Reita: "Yes. 'NINTH' feels like it could be our first album. It shows that the GazettE hasn't discarded anything."

■ Interviewer: Despite not intentionally changing, some people might say they prefer your early or mid-period work.

Reita: "Yes, I understand that feeling. We don’t feel like we’ve changed, but we get comments about how the old stuff was better or how people prefer our early or mid-period work. I understand that sentiment because I’ve felt that way about other bands. But we believe the latest work is the coolest, and we present it as such. If we were to make our first album now, it would likely be this lineup of songs.

■ Interviewer: I see.

Reita: "If this album had a stronger metal smell, people might think we changed after 'DOGMA.' But we make sure not to go in that direction."

■ Interviewer: You’re not a band that wants to stick to just one thing.

Reita: "Exactly. We don't want to be pigeonholed into one genre. As long as our live shows are enjoyable, that's what matters. We wouldn’t release CDs if we didn’t perform live. The album is meant to make our live shows fun. You could even say it’s an excuse to tour (laughs)."

■ Interviewer: After the whirlwind days, are you finally able to take a breather now?

Kai: "Well, I always think that taking a breather at this point is one of my bad habits. Now that the album production is over, I'm thinking if there's anything we've missed for the next step. Usually, I'd relax a bit while imagining the tour, casually considering my practice routines, but now I'm trying to organize everything, checking if the band is missing anything."

■ Interviewer: So you're intentionally keeping the tension high.

Kai: "Yes, I'm organizing the finer details. Not that everyone in the band needs to worry about it; it’s enough if one person thinks about it. There are always a lot of last-minute issues before a tour, so I'm trying to prevent that by planning ahead. It’s just that I'm being extra cautious without any deeper meaning (laughs). I'm trying to delegate tasks early on and have meetings about the stage setup that we usually push back."

■ Interviewer: I see. Regarding the drumming on "NINTH," it seems you had to play with a lot of precision while adapting to the wide variety of songs.

Kai: "Yes. Well, it's nothing new (laughs). Our previous albums also had a variety of songs because we like a diverse balance, so it's natural for different styles to emerge. For each song, I just approach it in a way that fits, and it's not like I opened up a lot of new possibilities. In the band interview, we mentioned how we did the recording and pre-production for 'ABHOR GOD' simultaneously. Basically, while I was creating the phrases, the members were listening and saying things like, 'How about this?' and then we recorded it on the spot. It was like, 'This has a live feel to it,' so we did it at that level. It was a recording where we built on what we had accumulated."

■ Interviewer: It's rare for the GazettE to handle irregular situations like that, but you managed well.

Kai: "If I could have my way, I'd prefer to spend time in the studio as usual, creating phrases instinctively, then thinking them over, communicating with the members, and making adjustments. So, I felt a bit less cautious this time (laughs). Naturally, I wished we could have taken more time."

■ Interviewer: On the other hand, it might have resulted in boldness that you wouldn't usually have.

Kai: "Yes, that might have brought some momentum. We ended up doing what we wanted. Normally, around this time, I’d be a bit tired of listening to the recordings. But now, I still have a pure listener's perspective and am engaging with 'NINTH' as a regular listener. Since the drum parts weren't meticulously crafted through detailed discussions, it feels fresh."

■ Interviewer: So all parts were created simultaneously.

Kai: "Yes. For example, with the tom rolls after the chorus in 'ABHOR GOD,' I thought about whether to make the phrases more structured for live performance or to let it flow more naturally, not too structured. I could only communicate with the members on the spot, and we decided on the latter, making it less structured. The other option was to use only toms, but we included a lot of snare too. But that made the snare parts feel too structured, so we decided against it. I ended up saying, 'I'll just play it roughly,' and when I did, they said, 'That works.'"

■ Interviewer: Although it was necessary, hearing such playstyles now is fresh and exciting for listeners.

Kai: "Yes, though other parts were similar. It wasn’t as rushed, but it was certainly tight. Instead of detailed listening, we quickly judged whether something was good or not. It was judged by the composers, usually, they might ask for specific rolls at certain points, but this time it was more abstract like, 'No, that's not quite right.'"

■ Interviewer: Honestly, it sounds tough (laughs).

Kai: "Well, yes (laughs). And when I tried a different approach, they'd say, 'Yeah, that's fine,' and that would be it."

■ Interviewer: Even though you were working under tight time constraints, there must have been a sense of mutual understanding and trust, like knowing what each other meant without needing to explain everything.

Kai: "Probably (laughs). That was the case with "Utsusemi" that Aoi composed. It required a lot of live drumming nuances that can't be captured by programming. Listening to Aoi, I understood he wanted those ghost notes, volume dynamics, and so on. It wasn't the phrase itself that was an issue but the way it was played. We communicated using programmed data, but it was clear we needed live recording. This level of understanding is a result of our 16 years together."

■ Interviewer: It was a method that worked precisely because of your long experience together.

Kai: "I think so. I wouldn't want to do it this way every time (laughs). But there were good aspects to it."

■ Interviewer: Though the recording process changed significantly, you still recorded the drums traditionally, right?

Kai: "Yes. For me, recording drums at home wouldn’t work."

■ Interviewer: For parts like those in 'UNFINISHED' and the straightforward beats in 'Utsusemi' did you feel more liberated as a drummer?

Kai: "When I first listened to 'UNFINISHED,' I didn't have any issues with the play or the phrases. I felt the same about 'Utsusemi' at first, but the B-melody’s groove was surprisingly tricky. It might seem easy to others, but for me, it was challenging. Musically, I tend to lean towards dotted eighth-note feels, but this time, it was more triplet-based. This created a mental block for me, as I naturally gravitate towards that dotted feel. Trying to swing it slightly made the song sound completely different."

■ Interviewer: Ah, I see.

Kai: "It didn’t fit at all. With the atmospheric arpeggio, my part felt oddly cheerful and out of place (laughs). This kind of difficulty is common with Uruha and Aoi’s songs. But with RUKI’s songs, I don't encounter that as much. It might be due to the different musical roots we've listened to or the fundamental differences in how we perceive rhythm."

■ Interviewer: With Uruha’s compositions, like "THE MORTAL" or "BABYLON'S TABOO."

Kai: "For 'BABYLON'S TABOO,' he brought a drum loop rhythm and said, 'This is the kind of drum feel I want.' The sound was unusual, quite percussive. It was a loop with sounds like roto-toms and a dry kick, not quite live. So, I had to think about how to replicate that feel in live play. Even the cymbals in the loop were very electronic. So, I started by communicating with Uruha. If he wanted a very electronic feel, I thought we might even consider using only pads."

■ Interviewer: I see, that's the approach you took.

Kai: "When we play 'BABYLON'S TABOO' live, I thought it might be better to use a drum pad on the side instead of a traditional drum set, but after talking it over, that wasn’t the image we wanted. So, I interpreted it as needing to rework the drums to fit that atmosphere. The main sound would be live drums, but there were parts where that wouldn't work. For example, after the chorus, Uruha wanted the toms to come through, but the phrase required more than just two arms. So, I decided to keep the live drums for the hi-hat, kick, and snare, but use programming for the toms after the chorus. How to handle this in a live setting is something we'll have to figure out, but it evolved from a very programmed sound to its current form."

■ Interviewer: I see. "BABYLON'S TABOO" has a seductive, ritualistic mood.

Kai: "When we were selecting songs, we specifically asked Uruha to compose a song with this feel. We thought this was Uruha's forte, and we asked him for a song that doesn’t fully climax. That’s how this song was created."

■ Interviewer: A song that intentionally doesn’t fully climax—interesting.

Kai: "Yes. Everyone understood that keyword, so I created my phrases to align with that. Similar to 'ABHOR GOD,' the idea was to bring out a nostalgic feel. I'm not sure if this is the right word, but I aimed for something beyond what words can describe."

■ Interviewer: While you show a low, grounded groove, "Uragiru Bero" features a fast beat, reminiscent of your early indie days.

Kai: "That's right. When I listen to music by younger bands, including those overseas, I often find them really skillful and impressive in terms of how many tricks they have up their sleeves. In that context, I don't have a wide variety of drum patterns, and as I said earlier, I don't deliberately try to expand my repertoire. But the GazettE has done various types of songs over the years, and I’ve adapted to them. My stance has always been to do whatever I can, and 'Uragiru Bero' is one of those tracks. If we were to do something like bossa nova or blues, then I’d think about expanding my repertoire (laughs)."

■ Interviewer: That’s hard to imagine (laughs).

Kai: "Haha! My goal is always to match the composer’s image as closely as possible, and if I can, surpass their expectations. I wish we had more time, but even if we did, I don't think the songs would have changed significantly. In the latter half of the recording, we worked on some tracks without vocals, but we have absolute trust in each other. Even if I couldn’t imagine the vocals, I knew they’d be great, so it was something to look forward to."

■ Interviewer: So, have you been listening to the finished product a lot?

Kai: "Recently, I've been listening to it constantly."

■ Interviewer: Since the final version took longer to come together, does it feel fresher than usual?

Kai: "Usually, by this time, I’m a bit tired of listening to the tracks repeatedly. I’d be listening with a more critical ear, thinking about how to perform certain parts live. But now, I’m still approaching 'NINTH' as a pure listener."

■ Interviewer: It’s your first original album since "DOGMA." Did the experience of making "TRACES VOL.2," which involved a lot of work from the members themselves, influence this album?

Kai: "Well, let’s see... not really. The recording process for that was very unique, so it didn’t affect me much. However, Uruha did all the engineering for 'TRACES VOL.2,' and that experience led him to want to handle some engineering himself this time (he engineered '99.999,' 'THE MORTAL,' and 'BABYLON'S TABOO')."

■ Interviewer: So, did revisiting your older songs from the "Dainippon Itangeisha" era during live performances provide any inspiration?

Kai: "It’s less about the specific songs and more about the phrases. It’s like, ‘Oh, we used to do stuff like this,’ so there might be some influence in that sense. I didn’t set out to reflect anything specific from those songs in the new album, but organizing live events like 'Boudouku Gudon no Sakura' and 'BURST INTO A BLAZE 3' brought back nostalgic tracks that we performed live… so that process might have influenced some of the phrases."

■ Interviewer: It must have been somewhat stimulating to revisit those early impulses that you might not be able to capture now.

Kai: "Yeah, when we play them now, the way we perceive the sounds is different. There are phrases where I think, ‘Oh, this is nice,’ and it’s hard to explain, but there’s a sense of timing unique to that period."

■ Interviewer: Timing, you say.

Kai: "Yes. The spacing between phrases, the way we handled the ‘ma’ (space), I found it to be quite good upon revisiting. It's probably at an unconscious level rather than something deliberate."

■ Interviewer: Those live performances were special, and I’m sure they left an impression. Many fans likely saw those songs as sealed away.

Kai: "As a band, we’ve always looked back to some extent. Not in a negative way, but we believe that the present is built on past experiences, so it’s impossible not to reflect on the past. Whether we show it straightforwardly or in a different mode varies, but we do reflect on it. But I was a bit surprised when Ruki suggested ''Boudouku Gudon no Sakura"."

■ Interviewer: That period was considered separate, right?

Kai: "Yes… exactly. It was an idea that went beyond what we understood up to that point. It was like, 'We're going that far?' I was surprised, but when we actually did it, it didn't seem so strange. So, in various ways, we've been reflecting on our past. At the same time, we have a fundamental desire to look forward and create new things. The GazettE is a band that can't neglect its past. There are some artists who can completely cut off their past and say, 'This is what I want to do now,' and I think that's a valid approach. They might have said something in the past but now say it doesn't matter anymore, but I don’t think that’s possible for the GazettE."

■ Interviewer: That’s partly because the GazettE is a band that has grown from the indie scene and carries the sentiments of the fans who have walked with you all this time.

Kai: "Of course, that's a big part of it. We pride ourselves on being a live band, so each song is directly connected to our live performances. While we fundamentally want to keep looking forward and creating new things, we are a band that can't neglect our past. It's not just about us; it's a space that only exists because there are people who empathize with us and appreciate us. Essentially, we're not just a recording band. That's why we have an inseparable relationship with our fans."

■ Interviewer: The creation process for this album has evolved, but it seems that the GazettE still retains its old-school mindset. RUKI often describes it as having a “gritty” quality.

"Exactly. We've really remained unchanged since the old days. This time, the album is simply our ninth one, hence the title 'NINTH.' For the GazettE, that simplicity is actually quite surprising, I think (laughs)."

■ Interviewer: Indeed (laughs).

Kai: "For us, it’s a very natural progression."

■ Interviewer: In terms of essence, it feels similar to when you made 'BEAUTIFUL DEFORMITY,' where you returned to the GazettE's roots.

Kai: "Ah… that one didn't have a grand concept either, and the content wasn't biased; it had various songs. It was a quintessential GazettE album at that time. Certainly, it's a similar work. For albums with a more defined direction or concept, there’s 'DIVISION' and 'DOGMA'... and also 'DIM.' Well, 'DIM' ended up being what it was. That atmosphere... (laughs). It’s not negative, but it strongly reflected our state at the time. 'DOGMA' was deliberately made with a specific concept, and 'DIVISION' was a conceptual album aimed at blending styles with a digital taste. Looking back, those albums are rather unique."

■ Interviewer: The conceptual nature of 'DOGMA' and 'DIVISION' often makes them seem like the main essence of the GazettE.

Kai: "Yes. But if you take a step back, you should realize that the GazettE does many different things. Actually, there's another core principle that we stick to."

■ Interviewer: I think 'NINTH' is an album that reaffirms that.

Kai: "Yes. But I totally understand the sentiment. Even I was searching for a concept for this album at first, before 'Falling' was created. When we were making the promotional videos, I was looking for something that would define the next album. So when 'NINTH' became the official title, it felt very right to me."

■ Interviewer: Yes, I also searched for various interpretations of the album title.

Kai: "Right (laughs). Looking back now, 'BEAUTIFUL DEFORMITY' definitely happened because of 'DIVISION,' and 'NINTH' is happening because of 'DOGMA'… Each experience we've had creates its own unique color, so it naturally reflects the essence of that time. For instance, if we had released something like 'BEAUTIFUL DEFORMITY' right after 'DIVISION,' following 'DOGMA,' I think this 'NINTH' would have been a completely different album. That’s very GazettE-like, not disregarding the past. After releasing 'DOGMA,' we wanted to release a ballad best-of album. Normally, people might think, 'A ballad best-of album? That’s impossible.' But because it came after 'DOGMA,' it made sense. 'Oh, I kind of want to listen to that,' you know (laughs)."

■ Interviewer: Your body must have been craving it (laughs).

Kai: "Exactly. The reason 'NINTH' took this shape is because it came after such a conceptual project."

■ Interviewer: The GazettE is a band that does what they like freely at any given moment.

Kai: "Yes, that’s the main principle. Basically, no one wants to do things they don’t like. I think all artists share that at a fundamental level."

■ Interviewer: Releasing 'NINTH' now and looking back at the flow of everything so far, it feels like the essence of this band has become clearer than ever.

Kai: "In that sense, this album should be very easy for fans to embrace. I hope they listen to it without any preconceived notions."

■ Interviewer: Moreover, I think people who have only had a vague impression of the GazettE until now might also take this opportunity to get to know them through this work.

Kai: "Yes, I think so too. When you look at the artwork of this album, you can feel the atmosphere and imagine various things. While it retains that GazettE-like essence, I hope people can listen to 'NINTH' with a fresh perspective, free from preconceived notions, and feel it as the latest album from the GazettE."

[eisforeidolon]

https://www.reddit.com/r/Supernatural/s/NwUjmZnu8u

Hellers on reddit

"

I never thought I had to write this but I feel this topic hasn't been properly discussed. Every time I watch supernatural, especially these last seasons, I get so frustrated by this issue and I don't know how people feel about this. Because, how I see it, there is a Cas that's trying to do anything in his hand to protect the Winchesters, making mistakes or not, but I don't feel that it's reciprocated by them, at least not always. And especially Dean.

Dean's behaviour towards Cas is an issue itself. He has a very complicated and deep relationship with Cas, or at least he is supposed to have. I feel like Dean can sometimes be such a jerk towards the angel for no reason, even though what he might have done is not a big deal. The problem is, every time Cas dies, Dean is absolutely devastated and feels like he has lost the love of his life (which is more than reasonable), but when he somehow comes back to life, Dean goes back to "normal" and his tough guy attitude towards Cas resumes. Look, I really like Dean, and I get that he has been through a lot throughout his life, but Sam has also been through hell (lol) and he happens to be much nicer and empathetic. What I'm trying to say is that Dean cannot be a jerk to Cas and then cry over his dead body, because, honestly, that's just toxic.

Take the example of Mary's death. Dean blamed Cas for that even though the three of them knew how dangerous Jack could become. And then basically he became passive aggressive with him because he couldn't forgive him for something he didn't do (why is Dean so grumpy in the last seasons tho?). Cas is one of my favourite characters, and I love his innocence and his unconditional love for Dean (and Sam), but I also love an angel who knows their worth and who can smite the hell out of everything. Badass Cas is amazing but I feel we gradually started losing that aspect as the seasons went by. And that's why I loved 15x03 because Cas finally confronted Dean and decided to "move on". And even though I liked what they did in 15x09, I sometimes felt that Dean didn't deserve Cas. He was always there for the brothers but it looks like they took him for granted, or that he was just being used, and it's really frustrating to watch.

This is one of the reasons why I believe there should be a reboot. There has to be an actual conclusion to these characters' relationship, be it platonic or romantic. I need Cas to be properly loved, not some bullshit subtle "we care about you, pal" kind of thing.

Yeesh. That's A Lot.

Like, Sam and Dean also have fans who are convinced their poor helpless blorbo has never done anything wrong ever and is just So Wronged by everyone and the narrative at every single turn? But I swear it's harder to find Castiel fans that aren't like that. Then again, it's hard to find Castiel fans anymore that aren't hellers, which I think is definitely linked.

We could talk yet again about what a load of utter fanon horseshit it is to describe Dean's affect when Castiel dies as "absolutely devastated like he lost the love of his life". For the pure absurd exaggeration of how they take one single canon shot of Dean looking sad and then write thousands upon thousands of words "interpreting" it and thereafter consider their fanfic of Dean sobbing in devastation for hours over Jimmy's empty corpse actual canon. For how sometimes it's just plain obviously not true (pie festival lol). For the fact when he is genuinely upset there's ALWAYS other more devastating shit going on they pretend to be blind to so they can pretend it's ALL about Cass (the Leviathan/Bobby's death, Mary being sucked into Apocaworld/dealing with Jack, Chuck going full evil, etc.). But instead, this time, let's stick with the theme of poor wronged Castiel, Dean is so MEEN *sob*.

It's not just that the angel is "making mistakes or not" it's that he is consistently time after time after time? Making the exact same fundamental mistake: going behind the Winchesters' backs to "protect them" by keeping vital information from them or outright fucking things up worse by trying to handle shit on his own. After which he generally either tries to run away or share out the responsibility of fixing it to them. Gee, I wonder why they aren't oozing with gratitude?

Let's take the example of Mary's death, to start with. Yeah, they all know that Jack's gradually becoming dangerous. But only one of them knows that he is already at the point of killing a pet dangerous. It's stupid to pretend that's not an obvious, major escalation. But Castiel decides not to tell anybody it. That's a choice he makes, something he very much DID do. You know, kinda like how he wasn't really honest about how bad things were all through season 6 and his plans with Crowley. Kinda like how he decided instead of trying to go back and fix the mess he'd made of heaven, he decided to stay behind in Purgatory but lie to Dean about it. Nothing at all terrible came of those stupid-ass "protective" decisions, nope! No reason at all to be pissed off at his terminal inability to learn from his mistakes!

Which doesn't even get into how he was the one that let Sam out of the panic room, but berated the Winchesters for their part in setting Lucifer free without ever mentioning his own. Or how his first impulse after getting his memories back wasn't actually to heal Sam, whose wall/sanity he intentionally tore down in the first place as a distraction, but to run away. (There's a reason Cass stans/hellers frequently seem to be entirely amnesiac about just how Sam's wall broke.) Then there's how he decided he couldn't trust the Winchesters with the angel tablet. Don't forget that he could hear Claire constantly praying for help for years and did nothing. Or my personal favorite, how he went behind the Winchesters' backs to let Lucifer possess him and escape the Cage after all they went through to put the archangel there without a fucking single word of warning to his supposed friends that he's sooooo concerned with protecting! Then there's stealing the Colt and leaving them unprotected and unconscious outside the portal to Heaven. I'm not even going to touch all the whining he did in the final seasons about wanting to be a hero. I know there's more, but the point is, gee, what a faultless, helpful guy!

My overall point is not even that Castiel is The Worst. He's not the only character who makes stupid-ass decisions. I think there are, in some cases, understandable mitigating factors (YMMV)! However, given the amount of times he ran off on some whim of his own and went totally incommunicado or the Winchesters had to clean up a mess he made (or just made worse)? Framing his role in the show as if he was "always there for the brothers" (remember how when he said that the point was he was lying?) and was soooo uniquely underappreciated? Frankly, they showed plenty of appreciation for him by continuing to count him as family/a friend and ultimately forgiving him over and over. Rather than, you know, stabbing him through the neck like they would have literally anyone else who fucked them over so routinely as he did while supposedly trying to "help" and "protect" them.