#i don't know why this is where my mind has chosen to write meta but it is

[severus-snaps]

Legilimency & Occlumency & Emotion

i was reading something somewhere (possibly on my binge of metas last night, but who knows) that Snape was very talented at Occlumency, but just about average at Legilimency - but I respectfully disagree, and here's a whole (3k word) accidental ramble about it, which started as an observation and devolved into how I think Legilimency/Occlumency works in the context of Snape and Voldemort, and why I interpret it differently than it being (entirely) magical dissociation and actually quite an emotion-based skill once it's more complex TLDR: I've often seen Occlumency described/conceptualised as a "shield" or some kind of suppressed emotionless state, but I discovered upon writing this that I think it can be quite a bit more complex and emotional, actually - just like Snape <3

Snape's Talents

The idea that got me rambling today went something like "Draco, who only had a handful of lessons from Bellatrix, was able to keep Snape out of his mind using Occlumency - so Snape can't have been a very good Legilimens, or Occlumency was easy to do"

And I do agree that Snape was probably better at Occlumency than Legilimency by sheer quantity of practice alone - and also that, outside of using it on Harry (and Draco) when they were up to mischief, and Snape likely wishing he could use it to work out what Dumbledore was hiding from him, Snape had no desire to see, hear, interpret or otherwise get the gist of what anyone at Hogwarts was thinking - but especially not a bunch of pubescent students, nor colleagues who liked him on a surface level but obviously were not close enough to think Something Was Up when he killed Dumbledore (which, fair in some ways, unfair in others, but I digress)

[side note: Snape can't have just not used Occlumency for over a decade before Voldemort's return, so I like to think of him and Dumbledore practicing to keep his skills sharp - although I expect that would be another 'fun' way for Dumbledore to hold Snape in chains which would make for an interesting fic]

I suspect that if Snape had chosen to, he could've invaded Draco's mind in that scene, broken through whatever defenses Draco used - but that's not a very Snape thing to do to a student, and especially not one he knows well, was a family friend of, has closely seen grow up, and probably has a soft spot for. It's very reminiscent of his conversation with Narcissa, to me. Throughout that entire conversation with Draco, Snape was trying to comfort Draco, empathise with him, get Draco to trust him, confide in him, offer support to Draco whether he wanted it or not - not further alienate him to a point where Snape couldn't help. And besides, invading Draco's mind aggressively doesn't sit very well with his vow "to the best of your ability, protect him from harm".

And as for Harry's lessons, Harry was using spells - which Snape seemed surprised, interested, and almost impressed to learn that were effective against Legilimency, which isn't surprising in itself as it's not a widely used area of magic. And since Harry had no idea that Snape (and probably Dumbledore) were 'reading his mind' for years before he learnt about Legi/Occlumency, I don't expect many people would know if Snape used it, or put up a fight using those methods - other Death Eaters probably stuck to Occluding, because it would hardly garner any favour if they cast a stinging hex or Protego at Voldemort or in a DE meeting Which brings me back to my other point as well, which was that "Occlumency possibly wasn't difficult to do". On a rudimentary level that might be true (at least insofar as any advanced magic was difficult to do - Harry was actually quite talented, e.g. casting a corporeal patronus at 13/14 or whatever, and Draco could do it after a few lessons with Bellatrix). Harry learnt almost despite Snape, because he didn't take instruction from him well and because Snape is (intentionally) abrasive in lessons (which I could go on about, since Snape couldn't really be nice to Harry when Voldemort was possibly looking through harry's eyes at any given moment - and as other metas have pointed out was another layer to Snape's rage when Harry looked at his memories). But Snape could do it without a wand, without an incantation, so he was reasonably skilled - imagine casting a full body Patronus or other impressive spell with neither a wand nor an incantation

Also we don't know precisely how long Draco had lessons for, it might have been loads and he was actually pretty good, or it might have been 3 and he was awful. But unlike Snape, who is not the greatest Legilimens of all time (that's apparently Voldemort?), it was glaringly obvious to him that Draco was using Occlumency - Snape had him sussed in like 3 seconds, and chose not to go any further for the reasons I outlined above - which interestingly he did not do with Harry, when faced with finding out where Harry learnt Sectumsempra (but at that point both Snape and Draco's life had been on the line - if Draco dies, presumably so does Snape?)

Which brings me back to Snape... How I think Legilimency/Occlumency works (sometimes)

You have no subtlety The mind is a complex and many-layered thing It is true, however, that those who have mastered Legilimency are able, under certain conditions, to delve into the minds of their victims and to interpret their findings correctly. The Dark Lord, for instance, almost always knows when somebody is lying to him. Only those skilled at Occlumency are able to shut down those feelings and memories that contradict the lie, and so utter falsehoods in [Voldemort's] presence without detection.

There's a lot to take in there, and also pretty ballsy to say to Voldemort-by-proxy (Harry), which might reduce the validity of my idea that Snape didn't want to be nice to Harry during their lessons in case Voldemort was watching, since Snape's pretty happy to give Voldemort (and the reader, more likely) a complete insight into what he's himself doing... although I expect that Voldemort has considered this, and also doesn't recognise the limits of his own power - or the extent of Snape's.

I also wonder whether the 'certain conditions' are something simple, like eye contact being made or the spell being cast, or whether there's something to the mental state of the 'caster' at the time as well, like there is with Occlumency walls/shields and being calm and empty-headed, or whether the conditions is the Occluder themselves presenting (or not presenting) some alternative things to interpret. One of the wizarding world (I think) pages says Snape trained a 'slight natural ability', so that makes me wonder more, as well, but i digress.

But my second point is this: Snape's talents weren't Occluding by total shutdown, or Occlumency 'shields' which always now irk me in fanfiction (this I'm definitely drawing from another meta but I have no idea where, so... apologies). Snape wasn't throwing up a wall in front of entire memories or thoughts, for the most part. Although I expect that between the Pensieve and Draco's example use of Occlumency, that was sometimes a function (e.g. some of the things Dumbledore told Snape to pass along, he'd have to entirely block out, alter, or otherwise adapt those memories to make it look as though Snape had passed information along of his own volition against Dumbledore's orders, or hide the fact that he'd helped Dumbledore when he was supposed to be helping Voldemort, etc).

So inkeeping with my own questionable metaphor, where Draco threw up a wall - metaphorically crumbling, last-minute, cowboy builder Occlumency where the wall would hold but you could see it very clearly and obviously; where with a lesser Occlumens the wall was nice enough, but you could see where the paint job didn't quite match up and the plastering wasn't done very evenly; Snape had the whole house set up so that you didn't know the wall wasn't there from the start, and probably had a few artfully chosen scuffs to make it seem real, or it was some kind of trapdoor under the carpet. (okay the metaphor died, but I've been watching a lot of remodelling shows lately, you get the point if you've read this far)

In another metaphor I imagine detecting a lie to be like running your fingertips along a smooth surface and finding a lip or a bump - you could then, pick at it, poke at it, tear it open. You could sense that something was being hidden, or withheld. But there were no lips or snags in Snape's thoughts; potentially Voldemort could simply not detect them, not even when he searched him openly, repeatedly, full eye contact, at the table at Malfoy Manor. Snape welcomed Voldemort into his (it's just occurred to me, but "mind palace") and Voldemort repeatedly, for years, could not tell that anything was amiss, and presumably Voldemort did this with much more ferocity (and skill) than Snape looking at Harry for 2 seconds and immediately summoning Harry's mental image of the Prince's copy of Advanced Potions Making

But it can't be down to detection alone. There's also a level of interpretation to Legilimency. So here I'm focusing on a more interesting aspect to me, which is how emotion is used in Legilimency/Occlumency. Obviously, Snape isn't Occluding all the time, and as much as I adore Alan Rickman, book!Snape was naturally a total petty, stuttering mess (love him for it) who only wishes he had Alan Rickman's gravitas, and could on occasion emulate it.

I told you to empty yourself of emotion! … Fools who wear their hearts proudly on their sleeves, who cannot control their emotions, who wallow in sad memories and allow themselves to be provoked this easily — weak people, in other words — they stand no chance against his powers!

I think this quote is interesting for many reasons I probably won't be able to connect properly and are in no particular order beyond how I thought of them

Snape is emotional here when he says it, he's angry, annoyed, upset, and it's an honest feeling, and he's obviously not devoid of emotion but can still Occlude Harry

Snape is an emotional person, much as he tries to pretend not to be, and can still Occlude Voldemort just fine even on the night he thinks he's marching to his death at the end of GoF

Much like how many other kinds of magic require lots of study and a strong emotion/will/conscious thought at the start, perhaps it become easier with experience to the point where this advice is not essential (e.g. kind of like driving, I no longer have to think about changing gears like I did as a Learner)

Snape is also talking about himself here, indicative of Snape's worldview where showing 'weak' emotions is the problem - soft emotions, vulnerability, "never tell".

"Provoke" is exactly what Voldemort does to Harry

This is Occlumency 101; Snape's teaching Harry the most basic of Occlumency - to compartmentalise, to block someone out, to throw up that shoddy but sturdy-enough wall for Voldemort to come up against, like Draco did to Snape. Harry's anger and emotion is a weakness in this basic Occlumency lesson, where Voldemort is trying to look through Harry and/or trick/provoke him; thus, the wall.

But this probably isn't the kind of Legilimency Voldemort would use on Snape (which is to see if he's lying, if his information is real, if his values are aligned, etc), and it probably isn't the kind of Occlumency Snape was doing in return, to lie or deflect suspicion or ingratiate himself. In fact, throwing up a wall is the opposite of what Snape does with Voldemort; Snape lets him in, lets him stare him down in front of an audience, all the while showing Voldemort what he wants to see. I think as well there's an element of a Legilimens 'grasping' for something, searching, "provoking", like how Snape 'grasped' for Harry's memories of Advanced Potions Making, how Voldemort appears to search Snape at Malfoy Manor - so if all Snape presents is a memory, empty, devoid of any complexity, Voldemort would question it.

In my interpretation, when Occluding, Snape displays a different type of emotional control; Complex Occlumency means you control your emotions, yes, but not block them off - Snape takes his emotions where they need to go, makes them do what they need to do, to support the interpretation he wants Voldemort to reach. He chooses to some extent what Voldemort sees if he lies outright or omits details (a well made wall, basic Occlumency), and chooses how to present it (complex Occlumency). And he does it with subtlety; he doesn't often outright lie, and there's a lot left to interpretation - in both Snape's speech (with Bellatrix) and his actions throughout the books, and presumably his Occlumency.

So I suggest that Snape, in a situation with Voldemort, must be able to "lift up" or "lean into" an alternative emotion for interpretation - the decoration around the wall, the interior design, if you will. For example, Snape couldn't tell Voldemort that he desired Lily, in a total absence of any feelings at all, without it coming across as false and thus easily detectable as a lie. And you know that when a young Snape, who's hardly made a name for himself (Snape's likely never killed, at least, and isn't especially memorable to anyone in Azkaban and is last named by Karkaroff, and other things I won't go into here) outside of overhearing half a prophecy begs for a Mudblood Order member who's the mother of Voldemort's downfall who's thrice defied him to be spared, you can bet that Voldemort will want to thoroughly find out why, so...

To me this suggests that there was a level of desire there that Snape could 'lean into', whether that desire be for Lily or someone else he found desirable to act as a kind of substitute - though given that Legilimency seems to work on mental images and memories at least in part, a memory where he desired Lily would've been useful. And I'm just using that as an example, because Voldemort would also presumably at some stage have interrogated what Snape thought of Dumbledore and Harry, and Snape would've had to lean into feelings of hatred and loathing - which he'd manage just fine for Harry, but Snape would have leant into his feelings after Dumbledore silenced him after nearly getting eaten by a werewolf and again freeing Sirius in PoA, but I digress

When Harry finally learns Occlumency (by his own admission) in the wake of Dobby's death, it's grief that helps him master it - which, for me personally, is not a detached, clear-headed feeling in any sense. It's visceral, emotional, and painful; all-consuming. It's love/grief/loss/strong loving emotion that forces Voldemort out, after he loses Sirius and again when he loses Dobby. But it's a contrast to the emotions Voldemort uses of Harry's to draw Harry out, via his fears for Sirius. But with grief, Harry's dived headfirst into feeling what Voldemort doesn't want to feel (unlike the anger), to keep Voldemort out of his mind. Whereas Snape would do the opposite, and dive right in to the feelings Voldemort would want to sense - to the exclusion of others. Would Voldemort even think to search for Snape's love for Lily, if he was first presented with something more visceral, with more negative connotations, like desire or jealousy, hurt or betrayal? These are the emotions Voldemort thrives on and can exploit, that he's familiar with, that he understands. In the context then of 'grasping' that's how I think Snape leads Voldemort down a path of believing him - by bringing honest 'negative' emotions to the fore that Voldemort understands.

this is really where I think skilled Occlumency differs from dissociation or wall-building. I think Snape would simultaneously have to dampen his 'lie' feelings and to raise the volume on the 'fitting' feelings for his chosen interpretation. My interpretation of this all stems from my experience of writing, of getting lost in music, in using those activities to "wallow" in certain feelings. Snape does not present Voldemort with his true feelings, but they are real feelings. So in that way, I feel Snape was like an artist or writer; he felt deeply, he felt conflictingly, and dived headfirst into those wells of emotion when he needed to - diving so deeply that it cuts off and hides the conflicting evidence. I feel that when I'm writing, when I'm listening to music, when I'm wallowing. And I feel a lot of sympathy for Snape, because it can feel like a real whiplash when you're midway through writing an intense scene or listening to some excellent music that really fills you up with something, it can take you to some dark places, and it's quite shocking somehow when abruptly interrupted - which would be what his life was constantly like after Voldemort's return, leaning into and shying away from/shutting down emotions and memories he didn't necessarily feel whenever he was called, and then having to return to work or meetings in that headspace, where everything feels out of touch and you're in internal turmoil. (Granted, I can snap out of it because the music or the writing is neither here nor there, really, but he'd be doing it with his own life experiences, with his own life on the line, and to repay a debt of guilt - there's a lot more emotional baggage there, and even more once Dumbledore died). And I think it would take its toll in other ways, too, which leads me to Lily...

Far from some people's cries that possessive or obsessive attraction or desire is some huge moral failing, I'd argue that you'll find a level of it in most teenagers and indeed the regular spectrum of human emotion - I know I've certainly experienced feelings of intense jealousy and whatever 'Snaters' (I'm not a massive fan of the term, but as a shorthand) accuse Snape of, whether I acted on it or not. So I'd suggest that Snape 'leant into' that for the sake of being on the receiving end of Voldemort's Legilimency. Whether Snape regularly, or actually, felt those emotions of his own free will or not is hard to say - since there's no actual evidence he did act possessive or jealous beyond the normal teenager level (and that's without addressing the fact that we didn't know how he would've ended the sentence "I won't let you -"). And I'd also go as far as to say that Snape probably, truly, had some awful thoughts (don't we all?) and so he was able to lean into some very dark and gloomy nooks and crannies of his mind, the parts we're told healthy people steer clear of acting on but also undoubtedly experience (jealousy, possession, rage, bitterness) in much the same way as a writer, artist, or musician might, to make his 'lies' and the stories he told more 'truthful' - which was why Voldemort trusted him so much.

TLDR: Snape's a man of many contraditions and very much emotional depth, and he manipulated his own emotions (likely to the detriment of his mental health) for years. But just as I, a fanfic writer, can vicariously experience the bitter resentment for a person who doesn't love me, can imagine a world where he can think those thoughts, embody them, and still not take them on as part of his identity.

anyway i don't have a conclusion, I just had thoughts

[Side note not strictly related to ANY of the above: I find it interesting as well that Voldemort's skill is apparently specifically in working out whether people are lying to him, suggesting that you could specialise even further into different aspects of behaviour. But people do lie to Voldemort (Narcissa, Snape, off the top of my head, but there's no indication of Voldemort using Legilimency on Narcissa in that moment where Harry lives - Voldemort was too elated, once again caught up in his own glory). [side side note: Harry's treatment after his 'death' does make me wonder, briefly, about Snape's own treatment when he returned at the end of GoF - public torture and humiliation, an opportunity for the other DEs to turn on one of their own to 'increase their own standing' in Voldemort's eyes, crucio to weaken Snape's defences, to check that his information and loyalty true? i get the impression that Snape shared his information with Voldemort privately, given that Bellatrix didn't seem to know much about Snape's return, but who's to say there wasn't some 'fun' beforehand, or at other points during his time as spy]

[vidavalor]

Hello!

This is random but I remembered your posts regarding The Situation with NG’s involvement in Good Omens when one of my followers on Twitter tweeted a screen cap of an old conversation on bluesky where Neil sorta confirms Amazon had pulled back his influence on production from S1 so there’s a lot of truth in what you said

Hope you’re doing great! ❤️❤️❤️❤️

Hi there! 💕 Hope you're doing great yourself. I usually offer snacks but this is a large sherry or Talisker topic so *gets the glasses*...

That's interesting info-- thank you for sharing it. Like I was saying in that original post, I don't know any of that for sure but that was definitely the impression I was getting. One of the several reasons I was getting that impression was due to other, equally unprofessional posts like the one you're talking about here that speak to already-existing conflict with Amazon long before this particular Situation became publicly known.

I'm not sure why he'd be trying to fight the studio publicly like that if there's not something happening behind the scenes. It's just unprofessional. I was shocked when I saw posts like that because it's not like he was being a whistleblower to egregious behavior or something-- he was bitching about his boss and the budgets to fans on Tumblr. It feels like he was trying to use the fanbase as a shield to keep himself from being fired, as a way of saying "you can't get rid of me-- I will tell my fans you are the issue and they will believe me and not you and I have a million of them-- just look at my little Tumblr thing. You'll lose money if you don't back me."

You know what kind of guy does shit like that? The same kind that tells young women that no one is going to believe them because he's a famous, award-winning writer and they're nobody.

If you don't mind, I'm going to use your ask here for a moment to add a bit to what I was saying about Good Omens being a through-and-through Pratchett novel because I think it's important to remember that this story has another author here. I've had some people ask me to expound on that a bit. So, for anyone interested, this is what I mean when I say that Good Omens is a Pratchett novel:

As most of you probably know, most of the posts I write about Good Omens have to do with the use of language in the story. The diction in Good Omens is extremely specific. Its quirky word choice, its "gayer than a monkey on nitrous oxide"- type of wordplay? It's funny on the surface level and it's a whole other level of funny when you dig a bit deeper. The cleverness there is familiar to Pratchett readers, as it's part of the distinctive style of his other novels. As a writer who is a bit obsessed with etymology myself, I spotted his love for it right away in his writing. It's in every. single. one. of his books that I have read and I have read quite a few.

The exact same thing is in Good Omens. It's a really specific way of writing where word-related jokes are the vehicle for the humor and etymology-based diction choices are chosen with great precision and inform the piece on every level. Pratchett's signature style of writing came from the fact that he used etymology as a tool to help him convey the messages in his writing. The thematic connections he was making were supported by the complex histories of the key words around which he was forming his stories.

For example, there's a meta one of you asked me to write about the halo in S2 and, when you look at the etymology of the word, as we're going to do in that meta, you'll see that halo comes from discus and discus is the root of discussion, the root of the word desk, and the ancient sport that is like ring toss. It was also the name of a threshing floor for oxen, which ties both to dancing and to the threshold of a door, like the bookshop entry. By the time we get through looking at this one, key word of halo, we're going to have taken this whole trip-- through other discs-- the magic ring trick, record albums, Velvet Underground cds, etc., through what it means to dance to the ox ribs to what it means to have (or not have) a desk to what it means to talk through your frozen peas to what's up with the invitations into the bookshop. Good Omens is not random. Everything is very specifically chosen to work together to serve an overall story that is structured around using the etymology of words to underpin its meaning.

This is just one example and it's the same thing in the novel and S1. Much of the S2 stuff connects back to S1 & the novel. It's a story that loves words and it's a story that is threaded together, thematically, through being told by using very specific words and their histories. Good Omens is written like a Pratchett novel and feels like a Pratchett novel because it centers word history in exactly the same way as Pratchett does in his other novels.

You know where that halo thru-line that connects everything came from?

Discworld. It comes from Terry Pratchett's Discworld.

The same, core themes in his books are being explored, just in a slightly different way, in Good Omens and, often, using the same words in the exploration.

Because that's the thing-- all of these posts I'm writing about wordplay in Good Omens? I could, if I wanted to, also be writing them about any one of Pratchett's other novels, and a lot-- and I mean a lot-- of the specific words being used in a big way in Good Omens actually overlap with Pratchett's other books.

One of you has been waiting patiently for me to write about Mrs. Sandwich and the seamstress-themed language happening in the show and, to do that? We're going to not only talk about her and what she stands for in Good Omens but we're going to talk about the etymology jokes Pratchett was making with The Seamstress Guild in Discworld. Mrs. Sandwich might have been new in S2 but seamstress language is not-- it's baked into Crowley & Aziraphale's speak back in the novel and, as you'll see, there are instances of it in S1 and the novel that only become more apparent once you know to look for them after S2.

When NG said that, back in the day, he and Pratchett decided that Aziraphale should have a halo that was like a ring toss-- no.

Pratchett decided that.

The idea comes from the wordplay that is literally *in the title* of his own book series. Aziraphale's halo is related to why Pratchett's series is the Discworld. It's the same ideas. NG has fuck all to do with it.

Think about how I was just saying that all this love of etymology that is in Good Omens is also throughout Pratchett's books and is the driver of his word choice in all of them.

Now? Ask yourself who came up with Crowley and Aziraphale's secret language. Whose idea was it that it be so punny and etymology-based?

Probably the guy who wrote all of those etymology-based, other books.

Who invented the rules for that language?

Probably the guy who wrote all of those etymology-based other books.

If Pratchett wrote basically nothing but intentionally, lovingly, word-nerdy books... and if Good Omens is, soup-to-nuts, a love letter to etymology to a point that its main characters have a secret language built around it, then Terry Pratchett is who really wrote Good Omens. He's the true author of the book.

There are even interviews that show they had much different takes on how the process for the book happened. Pratchett, in one of the ones I read, said he wrote more than 2/3rds of the books straight up on his own and that he'd have phone calls with NG before NG wrote his bits of it and something politely vague to the effective of 'editing over' when writing the next chapter. In the same paragraph where he said he wrote more than 2/3rds of the book, he also said with all that discussion happening "who can say" who really wrote what-- yeah, exactly. It sounded a bit like NG needed the phone call to be told what to write on his end and then Pratchett edited it/rewrote bits of it before he wrote the next bit.

It comes off sounding like this book was like a partnered school project where Pratchett was the diligent one who did all the work himself so it would get done and be actually good and then assigned a bit of it to NG to do that he then had to go and fix so they'd get a decent grade. I wasn't there so I don't know but that's a bit like what the Pratchett interviews about it sound like to me and I'm much more inclined to believe Pratchett's view on their process than I am NG's take.

All I know is that Good Omens was successful when it was first published and any even moderately successful book makes publishing houses jump up and say "MORE NOW" and if you were those publishing houses? And you had a popular project with two writers? And one of the writers became tragically ill? You know what you'd do?

You'd eventually ask the other writer to finish the series.

It is known that a trilogy was planned from the start, which makes sense because most books are planned that way. You actually have to rough outline the entire story arc and then divide it amongst the books first. The story already existed in full when Pratchett began to get sick. Never-- in over two decades-- did anyone ever go to NG and ask him to both honor Pratchett and make them some cash by writing the rest of the trilogy?

Not even with how popular this book is?

That seems pretty suspicious to me.

Like a 'they know NG didn't really write it' kind of suspicious.

When both the publishing houses and the tv studios seem to be doing handstands to minimize his involvement with it, I'm thinking it's not too wild to infer there that it's because he never really wrote much, if any of it, in the first place.

More to the point? They know he's incapable of emulating it.

Because he's no Terry Pratchett.

[dreamingofthewild]

Hi there! I was just reading your post on Mystra grooming and I thought it was very well articulated I just had one question on it. You mentioned that Elminster reached out to Gale when Gale was 8 years old and I haven't seen that mentioned in the game or in other lore for the game. Would you mind letting me know where that was sourced? Mostly because I'm interested on reading on that more, thank you

Hello there kingtycoon13

SPOILER ALERT: EPILOUGE

The reference to Elminster reaching out to Gale comes from a letter that Elminster writes to Gale when he ascends to Godhood. The letter can be found in a basket full of letters the player can read in the epilogue.

More under the cut

In the Forgotten Realms Wiki, it does say that Elminster took on apprentices from time-to-time. Sometimes they were by Mystra's request.

https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/wiki/Elminster#Apprentices

We do not know why Elminster appeared on Gale's doorstop when he was eight years old. We do know that Gale was a child prodigy who could summon rabbits when since he was toddler (I cannot find the dialogue for this on the web). If magic was unstable at the time this makes his power an even more impressive feat.

So Elminster had connection with the Blackstaff and was prominent in Waterdeep.

There is every potential that he heard about a boy prodigy who was living with non-magically inclined parents and rocked up to their doorstep to offer help. He might have been thinking about how Mystra will need more chosen when she returns, or he might have just decided that it was time for another apprentice.

On the forgotten realms Wiki it says that Elminster spoke to Mystra who possessed the body of a bear and asked him to find new candidate's to become her chosen. Gale would have been 22 at the time if we go with his cannon age of 35.

https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/wiki/Mystra_(Midnight)

I think that Elminster may have suggested Gale as a candidate when Gale was 22. Elminster has helped train her chosen before, such as Sammaster.

There is also a very interesting tidbit I found upon looking him up where he says he left the encounter feeling as though he and Mystra were in love;

https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/wiki/Sammaster

I do not know to what extent Mystra's presence could be felt whilst she was gone. But Midnight was said to have felt a 'presence' and her spells which might've failed succeeded and she felt like she was being groomed, before becoming the next Mystra. I cannot find any evidence to support a theory that Mystra was behind Gale's ability to cast magic at such a young age. But it is an interesting theory nonetheless.

Anyway, back to my original point. When I said that Elminster had a part to play, I meant that he is a renowned wizard and former chosen of Mystra. And he inserted himself into Gale's life when he was 8. It is implied that he did help him, and potentially recommended him if she did not already have her eyes on him herself.

Elminster does mention making a mistake in his letter, so could that be the mistake he refers to?

We don't know if Mystra sought Gale out as her chosen because of Elminster or vice versa. She may have set her eyes on him regardless but perhaps at a later stage. Either way, Elminster had a part to play in Gale being selected as her chosen.

My idea also stemmed from a post a read a while back where someone wrote Meta's on each BG3 character;

The final point I wanted to make was that grooming does not always involve one person. It can be an organisation or an entire industry which is set up to suck the souls out of people who have talent. Be it academia, sports, the film and music industries or the fictional industry of Wizardry.

But in general the process of becoming a chosen is exploitative and manipulative. We witness that in game with Shadowheart and Lae'zel. They were all groomed in different ways.

[vespaer77]

OMG I truly hope you don't mind the reblog, but I saw this in your tags and I had to comment. I had completely forgotten that he does say this.

It just goes to show how easy it is to misunderstand Gale's motivations. Ambition is such a running theme with him, and this point you've made in this tag is just such a perfect example of how much of a red herring that theme is.

When Gale brought his gift to her, he said he was hoping she would ascend him to something akin to godhood as a reward, although I think it was more like he was trying to show her that he was capable and ready for the responsibility.

And yeah, I can see how that might appear like a grab for power. Like the reach of ambition.

But let's be very real about this, and take very much into context the nature of his situation. Having been groomed from childhood for a destiny to be spent in service to a goddess, directly. A goddess who then, as a man, takes him into her bed as a lover. Who makes him believe he's not only Chosen... but loved. When in reality, he is only there to perform a service to her. And her relationship with him is just a way to ensure that he continues to do it, faithfully and loyally and without question. It's deceit. And there's no informed consent in deceit.

He is lead to believe their relationship is something it is not. Which is continually drawn into focus by the vast power imbalance between them. It's as dishonest as much as it is a trap.

So Gale's ambition is a facade. It's his mask. It's the armor that he's using to protect himself, because he is trapped in a powerless, inescapable situation. I mean, even his very best ending still sees him in service to her: giving up the crown, his last bid for freedom, and relinquishing it to her. Relinquishing his last viable choice for himself... to her.

And It's the reason why, if he does become the God of Ambition, it doesn't feel very good. It feels lonely and hollow. It's not a good ending. It's because it's not who he was truly, and it was not his real motivation. It was just the mask he hid behind.

He was after equality. He was seeking a loving relationship from this entity that he was lead to believe had become his lover. He was trying to close the terrible, cavernous, abyssal gap between them. She would never love him as a mortal man. Obviously. So clearly he must then become a god. He could be his best self for her that way, he could be what he thought she wanted and needed, he could be everything he believed he lacked, and then she could love him back on equal terms. At last.

THAT was his goal.

And he had no reason to believe she wouldn't. Out on her wiki page, it does say that Mystra has, in fact, elevated some (one? I forget) of her Chosen to godhood before. It doesn't give a lot of specifics on it, but it did happen. I can't recall the guy's name off the top of my head, I'll go looking in the morning, it's late where I am, haha =) I think it might have been the lich. One of those.

Aaaanyhoo, your tag just made me think of that. It was a really good point, and says a lot about his motivations that were largely misread, not only by Mystra herself, but probably a large contingent of the player base.

The sadness of Gale's story is delivered with such painful subtlety. By virtue of keeping the orb in his chest calm, Gale keeps his mask firmly in place, but in doing so it's very easy to misunderstand him. I know I sure did for a long time, and I wouldn't fault anyone else who did. That's why it's so nice to see tags like these and know that I'm not the only person who's noticing this stuff.

One of these days I'm going to write up a meta about the parallel between Rolan and Gale when you get to Sorcerous Sundries and how poignant that was to include specifically right at that moment. A suuuper duper interesting narrative choice that was just so well done.

Reminder & Spoiler to BG3 fans who haven't romanced Gale in any of your playthroughs.

GALE DIDNT KNOW IT WAS THE KARSITE WEAVE

Him being a god was not the initial thought process. Him pursuing the weave against Mystra's wishes was like him trying to buy a rare stone for a proposal ring and getting a uranium instead of a diamond.

Was he an idiot, who thought he knew better about retrieving weave? Yes.

Malicious and narcissistic? No. not really

People pleaser tendencies gone extreme? definitely

Him wanting to be a god by the end is him lashing out because he realizes his worth and it dawns on him Mystra abandoned him. It is also a desperate attempt to find a cure to his orb because he defied Mystra after act 2 (which is also under your persuasion) when he was already in hot water with her. He is under the impression that any civility or chances he has for Mystra's forgiveness is gone and his orb is still very much active.

Gale is just very human who doesn't really understand what cards he has and what he could play in a game with gods

Is he being stupid again by wanting to pursue godhood? Yes

Is he lashing out? Probably for some but for me definitely

Is he tired of being gods' plaything/pawn in their plans? Absolutely

Can you blame him after everything you see in act 1 & 2 with Ketheric, Shadowheart and even Lae'zel. The evil gods prey on you and the so called good ones abandon you.

[itspileofgoodthings]

community characters and what i like about each of them:

jeff: he’s a softie pretending not to be. a classic character archetype and a good one. he’s the official/unofficial dad of the group. he’s always got everyone’s back even though he’ll grumble about it, he’s selfish but deep down, ugh, fine, maybe he cares. he pretends to be exasperated but really he loves it. he loves them. it’s both sweet and funny to see.

pierce: he’s awful and cringey but he’s also truthfully lonely and awkward in a way that’s funny and that makes seeing him be included, maybe for the first time in his life, thrilling to my mushy gushy heart. he’s also just so off the wall and abrupt and sometimes when i’m really tired it makes me laugh until i cry.

shirley: i love the way her sweet act covers a hard ass and so occasionally she’s got to drop the voice and get serious. she plays the two against each other so well. also she’s so girly and flawed and i love that. she’s got strong mother instincts but also we see she’s very much a lost girl herself (re: her husband especially). she doesn’t have all the answers! there’s a kind of vulnerability to her that’s great and that we see rarely with older women. 

britta: the first couple of episodes establish her only as the snarky hot girl who thinks she’s better than everyone but as it keeps going the show lets her get wackier and weirder than that. she’s at her best when she’s being all blustery and soapbox-y about a social justice issue but in a way where you see it’s her defense/coping mechanism for the world. like it kinda seems to spring from insecurity which makes her feel more grounded. and it’s also great when the show calls her out on it. WHEN THEY CALL HER A BUZZKILL. AMAZING

annie: i love annie because she’s so sunshiney but also still layered. sometimes she’s brisk sunshine energy, sometimes bubbling, sometimes manic. i love her overachieving streak and her wide-eyed innocence and her overflowing sweetness but she’s better than the cliche in part because the show kind of lets her be insane (the show lets everyone be insane) but also because there is a core of steel in her that’s underneath all of her sunshine. she holds people accountable, she holds them together, she makes them rise to the challenge even when, especially when, she’s being cute and charming or seemingly deranged. she doesn’t let go of things, she’s determined and fierce and good.

abed: he’s brilliant, of course but what i love is that his brilliance is never limited to academics. in fact, the show never even says that’s where it really lies. it’s a sprawling brilliance, it covers everything he touches, it’s the force behind and the secret success of all his weird schemes and ideas--the way his mind thinks accurately and precisely in terms of tv tropes and themes and stock characters, the way he can create and run a whole chicken operation that takes over the school or accurately eviscerate the flaws of everyone in the room in 3 seconds flat. he’s got such a strong streak of genius in him and we see it played out in the world of friendship and humor in a way that’s so weird and special. 

troy: okay but he is kind of legit my favorite. he’s got the absolute sweetest most child-like quality to him but not in a way where he seems stupid. he’s not stupid at all! but his magic isn’t in what he knows but in the way he loves things and reacts to them and responds to them. it’s with this wide-eyed wonder that is SO funny but also really sweet and pure. Watching him react to things, especially when his mind is blown, is literally one of my favorite things about this show. It’s always wildly entertaining and it’s also always true. Donald Glover is such an incredible actor. 

[bakugoukatsuki-rising]

Thoughts on Himiko Toga

So, 289 gave us an odd look into Toga's thoughts process when it comes to people and herself, and I have a little bit to say on it.

I want to preface by stating that I think Toga is a unique and interesting villain. I think that she is very dead set on her views and beliefs of what she wants in her life, which is backed up by the manga, and so she should not receive any kind of sympathy or redemption for her actions throughout. Her sadness displayed is not genuine, it is her upset of her twisted reality not being able to come to fruition because obviously, heroes can't allow that.

So, let's begin.

So here we have Toga admitting her joy in being able to use Uraraka'a quirk to kill someone. Yes, we get further clarification for who it was and the context of the situation, but that doesn't make it okay. That doesn't make the genuine joy and happiness Toga has to murdering someone, even if it was in self defense, okay. This is shaping us the twisted mindset of Toga, of how she sees the world and her abilities.

There is no boundary line to her, because her world is just that, a world where she can freely use the quirks of people she 'loves' in whatever ways she deems appropriate. In this circumstance, it was murder.

Let us also not forget that Toga acquires quirks by draining her victims of their blood, which also leads to death.

"So that makes us the same, right?!"

Wrong, Toga. Your feeling of wanting to become the person you apparently love by draining them of their blood and then using their abilities to kill others is much different from Uraraka's genuine admiration and care toward Deku. Uraraka wants to be a hero like Deku, she wants to save and protect people, you want to take over their life and use their power for whatever you want. To live the way you deem righteous, which isn't righteous at all because you're killing people.

I mainly attach the above because my girl Uraraka I having none of Toga's shit and I'm here for it. Uraraka has already chosen to move forward as a hero and set her feelings for Deku aside instead choosing to grow stronger and aim higher as an individual and an aspiring hero, herself. I believe that Toga's mention of Deku was meant to muddy Uraraka's mind and distract her, it wasn't meant as a way to relate to her. Not really.

So here is the kicker that really gets me.

"We like the same boy, maybe we could confide in each other about love."

No, Toga, you could never do that. Your morals and Uraraka's morals are on completely different spectrums. I know this was made to be set up like Toga was considering joining Uraraka and the heroes but I promise you,

She wasn't.

Horikoshi has created Toga to be this bloodthirsty psychopath that wants nothing more than to take over the lives of the people she deems interesting. There is no genuine love for her, not when it comes to heroes, because they don't see the same world she does. Her love for Jin, I could say, that was genuine. She saw him as an equal, a partner in her own world, but she doesn't see Deku or Uraraka as that, because they aren't a part of her world, of what she wants their world to become.

I want to end this little meta by saying I like Toga as a character, I like all of the LoV. I don't like what they do, but that's the point. They're villains, we're meant to be angry at them for how they act. I had someone tell me I'm calling Horikoshi a bad writer because I, essentially, didn't sympathize with the way Toga saw the world and the hero society, and I got a good laugh out of it.

I don't sympathize with Toga because she's a murderer. She enjoys killing people, she enjoys causing harm to people, it fuels her, and that's what makes her so interesting. She's a psychopath. Hori made her that way on purpose. The people that are trying to give her a redemption and get Hori to save her are the ones attempting to change his writing, and obviously do not respect it enough to appreciate what he's done with her character.

Let bad characters be bad. Let them be evil and enjoy being evil. Toga doesn't want redemption. She wants the world to bend to the way she sees things and to accept her despite that meaning innocent people will die, and that's why she was upset, because Uraraka can't accept that kind of person in a righteous world, and Toga has no intention of changing to fit Uraraka'a world.

I guess I'll leave it there.

[esther-dot]

Hi! Hope you're doing well :) I've recently read through all of your works and I have to tell you that you're an amazing writer.

You've got this amazing way of describing the relationship between Jon and Sansa, especially how Jon views Sansa. I dont know how to explain it but I just feel the burn, the pining, the adoration in your stories more than in any other story I've ever read.

But just as important for me is how much I love your characterization and "positioning" of Sansa. There are all kinds of stories with her in different positions "at the end" like, as Lady of Winterfell, as queen of the seven kingdoms or just Rickon as king and her as his sister in Winterfell but somehow all of these scenarios feel wrong and incomplete and just like- thats not where she belongs and your stories are so satisfying because its like she fits like a puzzle piece exactly where you've put her.

And (this is gonna seem random) I sometimes wonder how this Sansa, powerful bad ass, i dont need or want a man, with people respecting her for her leadership, would coexist with Robb, or arrange around him? Like if he had survived somewhere in the Riverlands or if he had actually be kept as a secret spare prisoner of Cercei or something, how would he react to her being commanding in a way Tywin was and how interesting would the plot be if their positions are interchanged like that and Sansa did what Robb couldnt?

anyways I kinda rolled off the rails there sorry 😅 this was just my love letter to your brain and your abilities I guess 💞 (Sorry for the lengthy and pointless ramble)

I'm hoping you sent this to the right fic writer anon because you said some really lovely things about my writing, and I want to believe them! So lovely, I actually do wonder who you might have me confused with, but too late! You've already complimented me. I've already absorbed all this love, and you're never getting it back. It's all mine! *evil laughter*

Thank you so much for letting me know you enjoy my fics! It's really easy to feel inadequate in a fandom like ours. We have amazing writers everywhere. *whispers* I think the first Jonsas made a deal with the devil and instead of getting show!canon we got the best fic/meta writers and the smartest, most supportive corner of the fandom.

I tend to write a lot from Jon's pov (nothing predetermined, it just so happens), but now that you mention it, perhaps it is to better allow me to channel my adoration for Sansa. I do really enjoy QitN Sansa, and in the Sansa fandom, a lot of attention has been given to her “soft power,” so I’ve probably incorporated a lot of that into how I write her. Also, I think that’s where she will end up, that she was always meant to be a queen, so that might explain why it works for you. It is where she is meant to be! And, I get the impression that Martin is writing her as an ideal woman, so I tend to view her that way myself. I know she isn’t a saint, but that’s the “aura” she has to me, even if she’s momentarily cold or angry. I also think her kindness and loving nature will be crucial upon her reunion with Jon, so that’s always a huge factor in their relationship in my mind.

Now, this idea about Robb and Sansa coexisting in the end is interesting! Although, I don’t remember writing a Tywin-esque Sansa? I guess Sansa preparing the downfall of Dany without getting her hands dirty in “Healing” might count? Anyway, it’s an interesting idea that Robb would be a prisoner and Sansa save him. After s8, a lot of us celebrated that Sansa, in command of the northern army, threatened war in order to save Jon, because she was the hero who never came for her. The idea that maybe she would be chosen qitn, and then Robb shows up alive, would be so dramatic.  I don't even know how to work that knot out. I know someone said (jokingly) that the remaining starks should all jointly rule a la the Chronicles of Narnia, but can you imagine having to negotiate with a sibling about how to run a country? Particularly a sibling who was left you in the hands of your enemy at one point?

Sansa @ Robb: “You don’t like this trade agreement? You think you can negotiate better than me? You’ll just decide to keep our lumber because you don’t think iron is worth it!”

Robb *clears throat*: “Is this about—”

Sansa: “Yes, this is about Jaime fucking Lannister.”

--a month later—

Robb *clears throat*: “So, I noticed that you and Jon are very close. I hope you know that—”

Sansa: “You fucked the wrong girl, panicked, and married her. I’ll do what I want, thanks.”

Yup, their dynamic would absolutely be fun to write! Lol!

I read a one shot where Robb lives that you might enjoy, and here’s another by the same author but there isn’t as much of their interaction. I think you’ll really like their characterization of Sansa in that second one though. Jon was raised a Targ, she is sent to marry him, so tries to act like an idiot to suss him out. Very cute. 

I’ve noticed that a lot of fanfic is explicit, so I’ve always been a little "concerned" about my writing because I've never gotten into modern romance novels and remain devoted to my idol, Jane Austen, so when I write romance, it's in her vein. As in, it's not sexy as much as about identity. Who characters are, what they want, what their failures are, how they reconcile those, why they grow together. So the fact that you feel the burn/pining/adoration anyway is so encouraging! I don’t like writing plot, so Jonsa fic writing has been AMAZING because I get to do "the good parts" version of romance ie the love confession. I’ve probably written 2 dozen of those now, and I’ll probably write 2 dozen more just off the high of this ask. You’re the sweetest, and I hope you know that comments/notes like this aren’t pointless, they are why fic writers spend so much time and energy creating. I’ve said it before, but I shall say it again, even if you aren’t a content creator yourself, you are an essential part of your fandom.

Thank you so much for taking the time to message me, and feel free to send me more such pointless wonderful asks with other au ideas or headcanons or fic recs or whatever! <3

[ltleflrt]

1)PacificRimAU!Supernatural would be so interesting! But Cas actually being a Kaiju trapped in a human body is sending my mind down the path of possession!fic. I don't know much of what the SPN fandom has to offer for that since I'm new, just joining because of the Nov. 5 madness, but now I'm curious how SPN should map to Stephenie Meyer's "The Host". If we want to line up cheap endings, Cas would be transplanted to a comatose Jimmy's body to match the original S15 finale. But I'd prefer a story

2) with Jimmy as a CHARACTER and the dynamics with Claire and Amelia. Or the story could be Sam/Ruby and have the meta in matching "purposely using a comatose vessel so the creator doesn't have to deal with the sketchy ethics". I would definitely like the sexist and entitled undertones from The Host's ending to not be present in the fic though. (Why did she need to be named Pet?! Couldn't being brain dead be the only reason she was chosen, and not her being cute and petite and non-threatening?!)

Pacific Rim is one of my favorite movies, and I’ve wanted to write an AU for it for years. I actually started one with Mass Effect characters, but never got past chapter 2.  I’ve poked at the idea a little bit for Destiel, with Dean as an engineer, and Cas as a pilot who lost his twin and drift partner Jimmy in a Kaiju battle.  Also, the novelization of Pacific Rim talks about the drift expanding outside of the Jaeger and some pilots having a mental connection, and also some Jaegers seeming to sometimes move on their own like they may have some consciousness of their own, and those are ideas I’d LOVE to explore.  But the idea of Kaiju!Cas in a human vessel is fuckin’ sexy and if OP wants someone to adopt the idea, I’m willing to put it on the pile for consideration :D

I never read The Host, and I only saw the movie once way back when it was in theaters, so my memory of it is vague.  I haven’t seen any fics that are specifically stated to be inspired by that story, but there’s stuff out there dealing with possession now and then.  I haven’t read them, but I’ve seen a few dealing with Jimmy and Cas coming to terms with sharing a vessel, and there’s one fan favorite where Cas lose his vessel and lives in Sam’s head for a while.  I can’t remember the name of that one, but it was already a big deal with I started reading fic back in like 2013ish.  I don’t really read canon-verse stuff tho, so I’m sure I’ve missed a lot of fics dealing with possession and vessels etc. 

[allsassnoclass]

15, 18 (specifically for the tie me down 'verse ending since i KNOW you were talking about that but if you don't want to disclose then that's cool i just think about it a lot), and 20 go crazy love you a lot xoxo bella

Thank you bella :)

okay these are going under a read more because they got ridiculously long. I really enjoy talking about my writing lol

also some spoilers ahead....

15. Which is harder: titles or summaries (or tags)? I think this really depends!  On occasion, I’ll have a title while I’m writing a piece, but otherwise titles are pretty difficult for me because I really want them to have some sort of meaning. I don’t like just plucking song lyrics for them unless the song has some sort of significance to the fic, but sometimes I have to because I can’t think of anything else and that’s the accepted way to name fics.  Something like All I Really Want Is You is okay because I referenced slsp in the fic.  Something like Puzzle Pieces was taken from a running metaphor in the fic, which I feel better about because it’s something that is more specific to the fic itself.  Summaries are also difficult because sometimes I don’t have a few lines that I feel properly introduce the fic and hook the reader without giving things away, but I feel like people are less likely to read if there isn’t an excerpt??? idk.  tags are pretty easy though even though I’m always guessing a little and worried that someone will say I should have tagged it with something else or that it doesn’t fit a tag I added.

18. Do any of your stories have alternative versions? (plotlines that you abandoned, AUs of your own work, different characterisations?) Tell us about them. For the most part, I don’t have alternate versions unless it’s a prompt fic that I started out going one direction then deleted and flipped it around.  HOWEVER the Tie Me Down trilogy DID have a possible different third installment (spoilers ahead)

If I had written the epilogue from Jack’s perspective, it would’ve been a little bit of a different ending.  Something I mentioned in both of the first parts was Jack’s restlessness and Alex’s desire for something more settled, and one day I was listening to peace by Taylor swift and was like “wow this is Jack from the tie me down verse,” and that song could’ve very easily been the inspiration behind the third part.  Alex’s epilogue was based on best years because he recognized that he hadn’t treated Jack the best but resolved to then make up for it by giving Jack the best years possible ahead with all of his love.  peace as an epilogue song would’ve pushed the story away from a crystal-clear resolution.  that would’ve focused a bit more on the struggle of making it work with two people who want/need fundamentally different things.  It would’ve had much more to do with the compromise of Jack being able to give Alex infinite love and devotion, but not the peace that he craves.  Inevitably, something would go wrong.  “The rain is always gonna come if you’re standing with me.”  The epilogue would’ve then been about Jack living with that knowledge and trusting that Alex would stay anyway and that their relationship would be enough, but there’s still a lot of uncertainty of an imperfect relationship in that song, and it inevitably would’ve ended up in the fic.  that’s why the Alex epilogue was the one I went with: I needed a strong, conclusive, and positive ending for them, and Jack’s epilogue would not have given that

otherwise though I don’t think my fics shift too terribly much between when I think of them and when they get published.  nothing is coming to mind, at least not for things that I have completed.

20. Tell us the meta about your writing that you really want to ramble to people about (symbolism you’ve included, character or relationship development that you love, hidden references, callbacks or clues for future scenes?) Okayyyyyy a lot of my symbolism is in the short angsty fics and when I talk about it I feel like I didn’t do it well lol but for my unrequited lashton (I was done but you undid me) (spoiler) the buckling of the seatbelt was something I thought about a lot and ending the fic with that action was important to me because it was Luke making the conscious decision to protect himself in this situation.  there’s a lot of symbolism in the lie to me music vid in general but back seat of the car/no seatbelt is very significant because 1. he can’t swerve, he just has to take the crash and 2. he isn’t doing the bare minimum to protect himself from the hit, he’s letting himself take maximum damage from it.  while Luke may be in the passenger seat in the fic, he can still take that little step to protect himself metaphorically, which goes along with the decision to protect himself by not trying to pursue something with Ashton or try to get the validation from him that he wants but that would ultimately be a lie.

also fun fact! my angsty Luke song is putting the dog to sleep by the antlers, which partially inspired the bear-trap metaphor despite bear traps not being mentioned in the song at all.  when I wasn’t listening to a version of lie to me while writing that, I was listening to that song.

the tie me down trilogy also included a whole bunch of metaphors that first appeared in tie me down and I hate that for you.  when I do song fics, I really look at the songs for inspiration, so a lot of the figurative language and images in the songs were incorporated into the fics, then I combined stuff for the third installment.  best years arguably had the least amount of influence over the installment out of that trilogy.

I have had a few people ask if the cocktail chats reference in off-screen was intentional.  it was.  that moment in cocktail chats inspired the entire fic.  it all stemmed from a desire to put that one little moment into a fic.  also my personal thought is that off-screen Ashton pretends to dislike petunia but he actually adores her and calls her darling all the time when they’re alone.  Luke heard him do it once and teased him mercilessly.

now for puzzle pieces!!!! sorry bella I know that you asked this question and haven’t read this one yet but I want to talk about it so you can stop reading now because that’s what the rest of this ask is.

I talked about this briefly once, but the colors for puzzle pieces were chosen specifically!  there was thought behind it! 

Michael got red not just because of the iconic red hair, which is how I almost think of younger Michael, but because it’s a pretty loud and brash color.  Michael (especially when he was younger) doesn’t really filter things and wears a decent amount of his personality on his sleeve. that’s red to me, baby!

Calum has always been forest green to be.  This is partially influenced by the empathy hoodie (even though that’s a bit brighter than forest green), but it’s more because my associations with green have always said it’s a very dependable, stable color.  It reminds me of pine trees, and I think Calum can give off that same sense of reliability in weathering the seasons.  It’s a quieter color but can really pop next to another one.  It also worked out nicely that Calum and Michael’s colors were compliments

Luke gets gold because he is a sunshine boy!  Luke actually was the person I had the most trouble with, because I was flipping between gold, a lighter blue, or pink.  Pink ultimately was too close to red to make me be able to visualize what the marks looked like on each boy to my satisfaction like it just looked ugly.  I went with gold because there is a lot of outward brightness in Luke.  He’s the kind of person where if he’s happy everyone else gets a bit happier, and gold also seemed fitting for the eventual shift into a rockstar and the amount of talent he has

Ashton gets purple, but a deeper purple.  Dynamic but still relatively stable, has a lot of depth.  Purple is a secret color, but it’s still beautiful and it draws people in.  When I visualize it it ends up being a really dark shade, but in reality he’s probably more of a royal purple than a plum purple

I have a lot of favorite moments in that fic but one that’s standing out now is right when Ashton and Michael do their first touch: “The dark purple reminds him of spilling grape juice on his clothes as a kid, and when he collapses into Ashton he feels like they could have known each other at that age, too.”  There is something so charming about meeting someone later and feeling like you’ve known them your whole life, and that was significant here because Michael has known Calum and Luke since they were younger (although Luke did come in the picture when they were tweens/young teens instead of kids).  I wanted to be sure that although Michael, Calum, and Luke are the triangle, Ashton is an equal part of their soulmate group.  He doesn’t have the same history, but that doesn’t matter because it feels like he does.

also pretty early on in the fic (I think it’s when Calum is in Brazil) I say that Michael is always touch-starved for Calum, and I brought that line back in the hair dye scene because baby seasons change but people don’t!  one thing is consistent about Michael and that is his love for Calum, expressed here through the love language of physical touch

As for clues for future scenes... :)

anyway! ask me some fun meta writer asks!

[flamesrising]

You don't think Quirrel committed suicide in the game do ya? i mean he was by the lake last time he was seen...His weapon is there but he wasn't..

[[ A big and heavy question, my grey friend.

I believe it’s largely up to one’s own interpretation, of course, a lot of his dialogue is fairly vague. For my own personal comfort (and for the sake of my own writing over at @learnedwanderer), I do prefer to think that he’s not dead, and did not commit suicide. There’s a couple snippets of dialogue that suggest this, in my opinion.

The first is when you meet him at the City of Tears:

“The rain seems to come down endlessly, though.I’d like to see where it all comes from before I leave this Kingdom.”

Now, ‘leave’ is up to some debate here, but I’m taking it literally. At this point in the story, he’s still without his memory, so it can be argued that he’s just a traveler passing through, even though we all know why he was drawn back. For all intents and purposes he doesn’t seem very keen on dying.

Another after slaying Monomon:

“Be on your journey then, and allow me rest a time. With the deed complete, I begin to feel my age.”

Quirrel is obviously pretty old. Though not so much that he’s unable to fight, he’s probably middle-aged or a bit more, so again, I’m taking his words a bit literally when he says he needs to rest. He’s grieving and has just gotten some of his memory back, I believe that ‘rest’ is a literal rest, needing time to process everything that’s happened. He’s been through a lot.

Finally, his Blue Lake dialogue

“Here at last, I feel at peace.”

and

“All tragedy erased. I see only wonders…”

By this point he’s had an indeterminate (the game doesn’t really have a timeline) amount of time to grieve, process, and reflect. I take this dialogue and I see a man who realizes that he’s completed his life’s purpose, and still feels optimism and peace at the future, not someone that’s contented themselves to die.

In a fantastic meta post here, that examines the nature of Hallownest’s one-purpose-in-life culture, we can somewhat understand how lost Quirrel might be feeling at completing his life’s only goal, and yet, Quirrel being Quirrel, he still attempts to remain optimistic about the future, seeing ‘only wonders’ and whatnot.

THUS

I am concluding that he’s not dead, but chosen to lay down his nail since he sees no reason for having it. I believe he left the kingdom, perhaps needing to leave his weapon behind as a last remaining tie to it. Though we’ve seen other NPCs that suffer from suicidal thoughts after completing their purpose (Nailsmith), I, personally do not believe that Quirrel exhibits the same sort of mentality.

His characterization is based around hope, optimism, curiosity, and comfort. He appears in relatively difficult areas for the player (not going to list them all, but Mantis Village and City of Tears immediately come to mind), and he provides that beacon of safety and optimism needed to urge us forward when things seem grim. These are all my personal opinions and interpretations, but I don’t believe it’s completely in character for him to kill himself. ]]

[kylandara]

A very interesting take. I would sadly agree Jon fell from grace, because whether political Jon is true or not, he enable Dany this far to cause the destruction she did. Not that Dany doesn’t get the max blame, but Jon has his share for his own soul. I can almost imagine his PTSD when this is all over. Onwards

——————-

The hysterical reactions to Dany’s dark turn were initially amusing to me because I enjoy suffering, but as this week has gone on, I have grown more disconcerted by 8x05 myself. I am not an emotional person by nature, but each day I am more agitated by the episode rather than less. I didn’t know exactly why it bothered me so much until I realized that I was running through the same stages of grief that Dany stans were.

Both of us lost our heroes.

I had been laughing about Dany stans not seeing where her arc was going when there is ample foreshadowing in books and show as pointed out in articles, metas, posts on Reddit, answers here on Quora, YouTube videos, wherever it is you go for GoT fan content, Dark Dany has been discussed. I thought the proof was so overwhelming that to not see it meant you were in denial.

I did not know I was in denial myself.

I thought Dany stans were watching a different show than the rest of us.

The truth is, I was watching a different show than some of you.

As much as this has frustrated me to no end, I think it has been the greatest success of GoT that D&D have exposed us to ourselves. Or at least, it would be if we pulled ourselves away from our feelings long enough to acknowledge what’s been staring us in the face the whole time.

Dany was not the only hero who fell from grace Sunday. I have been grieving for my own.

Dany burned thousands, tens of thousands, possibly hundreds of thousands of people Sunday, a horrific and inevitable event.

My hero stood by and watched. Worse, my hero knew it was likely to happen and enabled her. Even worse, my hero marched his men South to help her. And still worse than that, when Varys looked him in the eyes and said they knew what was going to happen, Jon refused to even try to stop her.

My hero did not commit the inexcusable evil that Dany did (Yes, EVIL. Yes, INEXCUSABLE.) But my hero did not take a stand. My hero was not heroic. My hero stood by helplessly while children were burned alive. How harshly did I condemn Stannis and the Red Woman for burning Shireen because I loved her? How harshly should I then condemn Dany for the same crime tens of thousands of times over? How harshly did I judge Stannis’ enablers for not stopping him? How harshly must I then judge Jon for not doing something, anything before Dany burned King’s Landing?

Dany stans justified every life she took before 8x05. I justified every life Jon had taken. No, there is no moral equivalence between those, but on Sunday, both committed wrongs that there is no justifying. Again, there is no moral equivalence between Dany’s actions and Jon’s inaction, but I realized my emotions as a Jon fan have been paralleling to a much subtler degree, Dany fans.

They are shrieking about bad writing and OOC behavior, and I have been saying much the same of Jon. But, maybe I was just as deluded as they were, believing what I want rather than paying attention to what I was seeing.

I thought the Battle of Winterfell was bad writing. I didn't think D&D were actually trying to tell us something about Jon, but maybe they were. Yes, his strength is uniting people, but if they are being led by the wrong person, it is meaningless to do so. As seen on Sunday, the wrong leader leads to madness.

The events of 8x05 may be the narrative punishment for Jon not taking up his crown with further spiraling yet to come, or, perhaps it was the rock bottom of him refusing his destiny and what we witnessed is what motivates him to rise up. We might see him well and truly defeated in the finale by what he has participated in, or he might take a stand.

Either way, I don't think this season has been the total destruction of his character I initially thought it was. I think what we’re seeing is writers allowing a hero to suffer the emotional and psychological impact of what he's been through. I wish they would let us experience it with him, I wish they would have give us more that a rare glimpse, but just because I wanted something different doesn't mean they weren't being purposeful.

I resent what they've done because they took my hero from me and gave me a broken man. That's too realistic for me to enjoy, and I wanted to enjoy this season, not suffer through it. I did not want my vision of a victorious hero thwarted for anything. And that’s when it hits me. This is why it hurts. I can either morally compromise myself to pretend like Jon wasn’t wrong, or I have to allow my hero to fall.

Many were upset by Jaime returning to Cersei because we bought into his version of himself as a man escaped from his captor. We thought he had become good. We wanted him to be with Brienne. Yet, how can we objectively say that staying with a new lover is the morally superior choice to trying to save the life of the woman who bore his children? The woman who was pregnant with his child? In falling from grace in the eyes of Braime shippers, Jaime made the right choice.

Jaime is a better person for having died trying to save Cersei than he would have been had he chosen to fulfill his own selfish desire to let her die alone. He wasn’t good enough for Brienne before, he certainly wouldn’t have been if he had let his child die without attempting to save it. In breaking the hearts of shippers and fans around the world, D&D (damn them for making me appreciate them after I decided I didn’t!) turned Jaime into a morally superior character in 8x05 than the Breaker of Chains. A guy who pushed a child from the window attempted to save life while our Khaleesi took it.

Just because we have a version of a character in our head and a path for them to follow, just because we know what we want and are upset when we don’t get it, doesn’t make it better. Jaime chose better for himself than we would have chosen for him. Shame on us for being so morally incompetent that we didn’t recognize it immediately. By leaving her and trying to rescue Cersei, Jaime was closer to deserving Brienne than he ever had been before.

Another surprise in the episode is that The Hound had more moral clarity than Arya. The Hound who murdered for a living became the voice of sanity when he told Arya that if she followed where he led she would only find death. He told her to choose life even when he couldn’t. Arya listened, she chose to put aside vengeance and preserve life rather than take it. And here, we, the audience had been cheering her quest for vengeance, only to then cheer on the new decision, because we are led by our emotions and dumber for it. The Hound had better morals than we did. THE HOUND.

Cersei, that power crazed woman was just another victim. The bells rang and Dany burned them all anyway. And all the Dany stans who are finding ways to excuse, rationalize, or simply crying out “character assassination” are just in denial. Your hero failed the test of basic humanity because she has always wanted to. Her first instinct has consistently been to burn and destroy, she’s just always happened to have someone holding her back before.

That’s not bad writing. That’s making your audience question what we’ve been accepting and reject what characters say about themselves and think critically about what we have witnessed with our own eyes. It’s mental torture, but it’s the right kind of subversive because there are threads we can find that were always going to lead us here.

Some of us had been condemning Cersei and cheering on a woman who was essentially doing the same things. We just didn’t recognize it because we didn’t want to. Because Dany was framed as a hero, and we all know Cersei is a villain, we didn’t stop and think about what Dany has been doing for years and ask if it was right.

Jon didn’t know as much about Dany as we did. Maybe he hadn’t heard of what Dany did before coming to Westeros. Perhaps he didn’t fully comprehend what happened during the loot train attack, but he saw her talking about wanting to burn the Red Keep in s7, he saw what dragons were capable of beyond the Wall and during the Battle for Winterfell, he heard his queen threaten Sansa’s life for the horrible crime of asking what they were going to feed the armies. And yet, he refused to ever question her.

I don’t know that he had a good alternative, but Varys chose to defy the queen and die rather than take part in her plans. Jon refused to help him. Was Jon being a fool or was he being cunning? I still don’t know, but either way, he stood by while an innocent man burned. Either way, he did nothing. Nothing is never the best you can do. Except, nothing is what humans do all the time. I was prepared for Jon to lie, to be sneaky, to outsmart and use people. I was not prepared for that. I wanted clean margins around my hero, and they didn't give them to me.

People wanted Jaime to kill Cersei because we all know she’s evil, never mind the fact that Jaime has done his fair amount of evil, never mind that she was carrying his child. We don’t mind evil, we just don’t want it to upset us. In our heads, murdering Cersei was fine, but hurting Brienne wasn’t. We accept the grey, the dishonorable, the bad, but only when it’s in line with what we want.

I wanted Jon to be darker this season than the Jon we’ve had before, but I wanted it to be in line with the hero’s journey. I wanted it to be justifiable. I didn’t want it to be in the form of a mistake. I didn’t want it to be him misjudging the character of his queen. I didn’t want it to be at the cost of the lives of countless children.

I was willing for Jon to stray from the hero’s pretty, pretty path just enough to make it interesting, not enough for it to matter. This was a detour I did not expect, that I can’t just ignore, and that is a brilliant move by the writers. Oh geez, I’ve just complimented D&D again. Someone save me!

Jon, no matter what he does next, is stained in blood. He can’t be the hero I wanted him to be, there is no erasing this mistake. I didn't want him to fall prey to a cult of personality, I didn't want him to be stupid. I still don't believe he’s a total idiot, but while I watched 8x05 I took notes and when I reviewed them, I sounded like two different people. One screaming at Jon for being a moron, the other entirely sympathetic because he didn't have a choice. Both views were guided by my emotions. Whether he fell in love and was in denial or if Pol Jon is true and he believed he had no choice, Jon was complicit.

Either because he allowed love to blind him, or desperation to take over, while I still have hope for him, I can't deny what I saw. I hated seeing Jon as he is now: a man made less than what he is. He isn’t the hero I had fabricated in my head. I didn’t even know I had done that, but I had. This isn’t what I wanted. It’s not how the story is supposed to go.

But it is how this story went.

I wanted the fairytale. I wanted Jon to be untouched by what Dany did. I wanted him to remain innocent. I didn’t want him to be weak. I didn’t want him to fall. I wanted him to be above this.

But on Sunday our heroes fell.

What happens when they fall?

We can deny, excuse, insist its solely bad writing, claim it’s OOC, or we can accept that we are simply upset because it isn’t what we wanted. The second step is to acknowledge that this is what it means to have morally grey characters. This is the realism in fantasy GoT has always been touted for, we just never had to suffer so much for it all at once. We never had to face the reality that our heroes aren’t pure goodness, our villains aren’t pure evil with such high stakes before. It’s one thing for Jon to miscalculate and be murdered by his men, it’s another for him to not prevent a city of people from burning alive.

The “grey character” idea only works if you still recognize good and evil. We can’t twist right and wrong to make sure our heroes are always in the clear. Grey characters does not mean we should be morally colorblind. It means that the good and bad still exist, but that both reside in each character and in each of us. We have to choose how to act, and in certain situations, we will wander closer to one side than the other. It’s saying, let’s make heroes falter and villains sympathetic and force ourselves to see ourselves in what we hate, and what we hate within ourselves.

We had seen the good side of Dany intermingled with the bad, but the bad emerged in an unprecedented way on Sunday, and suddenly now we know that how we had masked it was always about protecting our own feelings, not about understanding who that character was at her core. Some in the audience have found strength in Dany, and to see her fall tore at parts of themselves that she had impacted.

Jon is still lighter grey than Dany, but on Sunday, I saw a streak of something repugnant to me, something that is the natural fallout of Jon’s behavior all season, but I had been ignoring it. Before this season aired, I expected victorious Jon. Now I think, even if Jon survives, I don't know how he'll live.

It is shocking to me how much it hurts to let go of my delusions and think, this is it. This is what all those words I’ve been spouting off about complex characters mean, and now I have to accept it. I have to “Look the truth in the face” as Sansa says, and as silly as it is since it is a tv show, it genuinely hurts! To a certain as yet to be quantified amount, Tyrion and Jon refused to do this. To a greater extent, Dany stans refused to.

I refused to.

So, what do we do when our heroes fall?

We must choose to be heroic ourselves. We acknowledge the truth. No more complaints or excuses. Our heroes fell last Sunday because this is that story.

I mentioned in a previous answer that I had a general feeling of defeat this season, and I think this is why. Jon has been slipping off the pedestal, and I have been trying to keep him up there anyway. Whether Jon was a “Northern Fool” or unsuccessful “Political Jon,” he isn’t the man I wanted him to be. D&D emphatically knocked him off his hero perch Sunday. Silly to be so attached to keeping him there, but I was. Emotionally, I was depending on my hero to make it all better. Maybe the point is, there is no hero who can?

Dany climbed too high and fell too far. She isn’t coming back from this. In my eyes, Jon hasn’t. D&D just made him fallible. He made a grave error and thousands upon thousands of people paid for it. I thought he would rise up a hero and prevent this, but there was nothing in this season to indicate that he could or would, and when the time came, he didn’t. I didn’t expect to see consequences for his “My Queen” routine, heroes don’t usually suffer those, but it is right that Jon see where that leads. It is good that we see it.

I think that’s what I’ve been mourning. I wanted hero Jon, not human Jon. Seeing Jon stand there with Drogon over his shoulder while Varys burned was very upsetting. I couldn’t reconcile it with who I thought Jon was, but that’s because I was thinking in the traditional sense of hero. In other books and shows, that wouldn’t happen. But, Jon made a series of choices that led to his presence and inability to do anything at Sunday night’s slaughter. Based on his decisions this season, Jon’s fate of standing there while people were murdered was just as inevitable as Dany’s fate of being the one to burn them.

It is much harder on the audience to endure this kind of story, but GoT has never tried to be easy. I didn’t want this, but it’s okay to not always get what we want. It’s okay for the writers to crack my rose-colored glasses.

Regardless of my misconceptions, in spite of his mistakes, Jon is still Jon. I still have faith in him. He’s just not impervious to failure, and somehow, I had forgotten that. And, for the first time, I genuinely do not know what the cost of this will be. That’s why I am so disturbed. I don’t want Jon to suffer, but his inaction may require narrative punishment. Maybe what we witnessed is the only catalyst that would force him to do what he needs to do, but it may be his mental and emotional undoing.

I don’t want that. I am uneasy after this episode because for the first time, I am genuinely wondering if I was wrong all along. Maybe this story isn’t building up to Jon defeating all odds, maybe the odds defeat him. So, instead of insisting that the writers are wrong, I am wondering what story it is they are telling. Is this a story about what it takes to make a man who can survive the game? Is it about a man who refused to play the game and will therefore be punished? Is it about a man who tried to play the game and learns that there is no winning without losing? Is the point that there is no winning at all?

I don’t know anymore.

So, in this, I have sympathy for the other side of the fandom that has broken hearts this week. And it isn’t entirely because D&D made bad choices, wrote this season poorly, should have had a longer season. I am upset because I am not liking the story they are telling me. I am not sure that that is anyone’s problem but my own for not recognizing what this was from the beginning. I’m still hopeful, I don’t know what we will see in the finale, but I have to accept that my hero fell on Sunday, and I don’t know if he will get back up. He could, but it is possible that he won’t

[florencetheflowerfairy]

What don't you like about Yamato's characterization in tri.?

Hello Anon! Thank you for yourquestion! You must have read this piece I wrote a few months ago after seeing Soshitsu. I had to think aboutyour question for a while to articulate clearer reasons.

I’ve got 2,000 words for you underthe cut. It was good to put my thoughts in order, and I tried to be fair, but I’malso a Negative Nancy when it comes to serious tri. meta and I don’t expect anyone to be as particular as I am. (Ijust reread it and GOD I’m particular.)

I figured that it’s only fair tosay that tri Yamato has an enormousdisadvantage in that I will constantly be comparing his characterization to Adventure Yamato. Because season 1Yamato is this incredibly complex, well written character in a very smart kids’show. He’s a lonely child with a broken heart, and yet he gets stuck with thecrest of friendship, and he sinks so low, but he still comes back, and he learns how to love, and how to be loved, and he grows so much and it’s so satisfying to watch that happen!!

It’s difficult for tri Yamato to measure up to those highstandards.

But at the same time, I want toemphasize that there are many things that I like about Yamato in tri! It’s obvious that the makers of tri also care about him. (He must be somebody’s favorite.) There aremany instances when he feels just rightand seeing that animated and voiced makes me ridiculously happy. For example,the scene in Ketsui when he objectedto Gabumon losing the costume contest made me laugh so hard that I had to pausethe movie. For a more serious example, I adored when he went to visit Takeru’sapartment in Kokuhaku. Then there areall these little moments that I enjoy, like seeing him do so much cooking, orhearing him sing new songs. There’s a lot to love! It’s just…a shallow kind oflove for me. But it’s not an issue of lackof care; it’s an issue of having different priorities.

Where tri. and I differ pretty significantly is when it comes to thesecharacters’ roles and relationships.

What I ultimately don’t like aboutYamato and Taichi in tri. is thattheir characters revolve SO MUCH around each other at the expense of theirrelationships with other people. I think that this makes their role reversalsignificantly less interesting than it could have been. I think it makes theircharacters feel isolated and narrow.

Other relationships vs. relationship with Taichi

In Adventure, Yamato has fascinating relationships with Taichi,Takeru, Sora, Jyou, Gabumon, and his parents, and these relationships are allpivotal to his growth as a person. In tri.?I think that Yamato is like a moon that orbits the planet Taichi. He interactswith Takeru, Sora, and Gabumon…but are they really contributing to his growthas a person? I don’t think that they are. I don’t think these otherrelationships are evolving much. To me, they feel static and peripheral.

The primary effect of this for meis that he’s a more boring character. I love his relationship with Taichi, andobviously it’s the strongest relationship portrayed in Adventure too, but their friendship is more interesting to me if Ican compare it to their other friendships.

As I was writing this essay, itdawned on me that THIS is the real reason it hurt so much when Yamatocomplained about Jyou not coming in the gazebo scene in Ketsui, and when Yamato joined Taichi in saying “What a pain” toSora’s face in Soshitsu. It’s notlike “Yamato isn’t allowed to say insensitive things ever.” In fact, hisbehavior to Jyou in season 1 episode 23 (the restaurant episode) and hisbehavior to Sora in episode 45 (when Pinocchimon kidnapped Takeru) was much worse than his behavior to them in tri. And yet, those scenes in which heloses his temper in Adventure aresome of my FAVORITE moments! That’s because Adventuretreated Yamato’s temper very seriously. Season 1 Yamato always felt so guiltyafter losing his temper at his friends. The writers in Adventure gave me the emotional satisfaction of seeing Yamato makemistakes with Jyou and Sora, but then he would always feel self-conscious andtry to make things better with them. The staff behind tri doesn’t care that much about Yamato’s friendships with Jyou andSora (certainly not at the level I care about them), so it feels like a slap inthe face when tri Yamato saysoffensive things about them.

The loss of Taichi’s other interesting friendships and how that affectsYamato

On the flip side, I don’t think thetri. staff cares about how Taichi’sfriendships with Sora and Koushiro were presented as equally important to Taichi’sfriendship with Yamato in season 1. Instead, the way they write it in tri, Yamato seems to be the only one whocares about how Taichi is suffering from guilt and fear. And this affectsYamato’s characterization because I can’t put his feelings towards Taichi intoperspective. It’s difficult to appreciate the stakes of Taichi’s internalstruggle if Yamato is the only one who seems to think it’s a big deal. Myknowledge of these three close friendships tells me that Sora and Koushiroshould also want to help Taichi with his fear of collateral damage. Instead,Sora, Koushiro, and everyone else acts like the main problem is that “Taichiand Yamato are having another fight like they always do, but they’ll sort itout themselves eventually.” It’s so oddto give Taichi this crippling fear of collateral damage and nobody has taken the time to talk to himabout it over a period of months. Ithink Hikari even frames his struggle as “You can’t bear to face Yamato.”

So both Taichi and Yamato feel likeisolated characters to me. I don’t think that the writers care to show howtheir unusual behavior is affecting the group as a whole. They’re only interested in showing how their behavioraffects each other.

Painfully slow development

While other major Chosen Childrenget well-paced character arcs in a single movie, Taichi and Yamato seem to behaving their conflict drawn out over all six movies. I personally find thepacing too slow.

It’s also frustrating to watchYamato “learn how to be sensitive to Taichi when Taichi is sad,” when being“the sensitive one” was Yamato’s strength in season 1.

Yamato was extremely frustratingfor me to watch in the first two movies. His lines in the gazebo scene in Ketsui in particular make me cringe(when he complains about Jyou not showing up to their meeting, and Taichi thentells him to lay off). The gazebo scene feels like an obvious parallel to thegraveyard scene in Adventure, whereMimi is crying about their dead digimon friends, and Taichi insists that theyhave to keep going, while Yamato insists that Taichi needs to think about otherpeople’s feelings. The gazebo scene feels like an IMPORTANT scene in tri. that establishes how Taichi andYamato are “different” now, but Yamato feels like he’s lost his core values forthe sake of a badly developed role reversal. It feels like Yamato has movedbackwards in character development.

Fortunately, things improve forYamato’s characterization in movies 3 and 4, when we finally see Yamato act self-conscious for losing his temper atTaichi. In movie 3, then he tells Taichi that they won’t have to evolveOmegamon and blushes as he says “That’s easier for you.” In movie 4, heconfesses that he “expects too much” of Taichi. Those are solid scenes! But itfrustrates me, because I personally see it as Yamato learning a basic lesson solate, and it frustrates me that thisdevelopment revolves entirely around Taichi.

So Yamato does seem to have a character arc in tri., which is better than what Iinitially feared—but I personally find it an uninteresting character arc.

Too much of a good thing

For all that I love Yamato, I don’twant him to be the main character. I find him much more compelling when he’splaying second fiddle.

After making Taichi such a passivecharacter, Yamato becomes such an oddly active character that he often feelslike the real protagonist. Like he should be the one wearing the goggles, notTaichi. I think that’s intentional, because I can tell that the writers love Yamato and giving him screen time,but I’m not a fan of that choice. I’m not interested in a scene where Yamatorides on his motorcycle and tracks down government agents in a parking lot (ascool as that is!), if it means that the writers pay less attention to Taichi.

I want to see more of how Taichifeeling down in the dumps would expose Yamato’s own vulnerabilities. Because ifTaichi isn’t there to be a goodleader for the team, then I think that the other group members should act more stressed, and Yamato would feel pressuredto fill in Taichi’s shoes as the leader, but he can’t, because Yamato isn’tas good a leader as Taichi and I think that’s important. Yamato’s roleshould be to inspire Taichi to be a better person for the team, not just for Omegamon. These are purely my ownopinions, but I just find it mind-boggling that the writers are so uninterestedin actually developing the protagonist’sstruggles and how that would affectthe team. Why do they make Taichi and Yamato so isolated?

Well. There is actually one morereason.

I only have so much patience for queerbaiting

Taichi and Yamato’scharacterization and isolation from the group make more sense to me when Iconsider that the story is really about their romantic feelings towards eachother. And not really about collateral damage at all.

I know that it’s not the worst caseof queerbaiting in the world. But the subtext is still very strong, muchstronger than in the original series, and it does make me sad that the tri. writers will not follow through onthis in the text itself. I can enjoy the queer romantic moments on a shallowlevel, but when I think about it seriously for meta, then it does make me sad.

I take an extremely negative viewof the tri. staff when it comes toshipping/romance. To me, it feels like they are trying to cover up for the“mistake” of the canon controversial ship Sorato. They vaguely acknowledge it,but they essentially ignore Sora and Yamato’s special relationship. (And we’restill waiting on developments, but I’m not a fan of the implications thatTaichi will end up with Meiko, because “girls exist to be love interests andTaichi didn’t get the girl last time.”) They often make Sora interact with bothTaichi and Yamato at the same time, and they make both boys appear“incompetent” for laughs. Meanwhile, they raise the romantic tension becauseTaichi and Yamato by 1000%, because hey, they don’t have to worry about takingit seriously!

That’s such a Debbie Downerperspective, I know. It’s…really hard for me to trust the writers of tri to take these relationshipsseriously. I’m sorry.

Final thoughts

When all is said and done, I thinkthat if you’re fascinated by Taichi and Yamato’s relationship, then tri. has a lot to offer you! I thinksome of the best meta about tri. hasbeen written about the two of them.

I also think that if you have abetter attitude about tri. in generalthan I do, then you can look at tri.Yamato’s growth and find interesting things to say about it. (I admit to havinga pretty poor attitude about tri. ingeneral.)

I personally need Taichi and Yamatoto exist outside of each other in order for me to find them interesting.(Anyone who’s been on my tumblr for five minutes can probably figure out thatI’m a biased obsessive Sorato and Taishiro fan.)

And finally…I’ve only seen the tri. movies once each. (Except for Sakai/Reunion, because I also saw theEnglish dub in theaters—and I liked it much better watching it the second time,when my expectations were realistically adjusted.) So that means I’ve based allmy analysis on my long-term memory, which isn’t always the greatest. Butobviously, even if my enjoyment of tri.is shallow, my passion for the characters is kinda intense.

Thank you again for your question,Anon. It was good to try to put my thoughts in order.

[the-100-meta-library]

And again I admire what you're doing but you seem very biased with your meta in general, I just frankly don't think you'll be able to handle archiving clexa/lexa meta

anonymous asked:

I know you won't publish this but meta writers like X, Y, and Z have outright called Lexa a rapist before. There's also no such thing as arguing it's canon, it's not, and you reblogging that kind of meta because it has "reasons" would mean you're condoning a lesbian character being called a rapist. I know what you're trying to do and it's admirable, but it'll be very hard for you to find meta from that side of the fandom that isn't lesbophobic.

Hi nonny!

I think that those two messages go hand in hand, so Ipublished them at once.

 However, I had to redact some names and I think that youmight understand why, as you have chosen to stay anonymous as well. And that’sabsolutely okay.

  For yourask:

Readingyour message, I really hope that you didn’t misunderstand my intention and examplesin one of the previous asks.

The one youand I refer to did deal with two topics:

1)      if we would post metas from actualLexa/Clexa fans which I affirmed,

2)      and because it was brought up, Ideemed it necessary to explain the library’s definition of ‘hate’ and ‘inoffensive’when it comes to our meta evaluation.

 For thelatter, I have thought of random phrases with random characters A-D to makeclear what we see as straight up as ‘hate’ or ‘inoffensive’.

Me,choosing a more explicit example with throwing in ‘rapist’, was BY NO MEANS meantin combination with Lexa in any way. Character D could have also been aterrorist, a religious fanatic, or someone who simply hates on animals.(‘rapist’ was just at the forefront of my mind when I thought of examples;blame the news)

 For youaccusing meta writers X, Y, and Z of calling Lexa a rapist, I would have to seethose specific metas to give a definite answer. I know that some of them havementioned Lexa in their posts but I cannot remember what exactly they have saidabout her (as I was fairly new in the fandom at that time and didn’t followmost of them, and still do). So I will refrain from any judgment here for now.

 However,let’s say for the sake of the argument the-100-meta-library would reblog a (persuasive)meta like that. For you, this would mean that either I, or my co-librarian, are“condoning a lesbian character being called rapist”.

Similarly,this would mean that any library that has (persuasive) books about dictatorshipis a fan of said way of leadership, and that they “condone” those actions tiedto it. And we know that this is not true.

A librarywill also offer (persuasive) literature about democracy among many other formsof governing. All those different pieces are collected in one place and madeavailable for the public to give them the chance to educate themselves, tolearn more about different point of views, and to be able to form an opinion ontheir own as well as drawing their own conclusions in the end.

 Startingthis project, this was my sole intent with the hope that we might reach anoverall understanding of each other.

 I admitthat there is a lot of potential for improvements and being still a ‘blog infant’(with the blog being approx. 2 months old), there is time for it to grow and todevelop by including more diverse collection of metas, especially during thehiatus. Always a work in progress one could say.

 Be assuredthat for my personal or more ‘biased’ views as you called it, I still have myown blog and I have no intention to change that. In fact, you will see thatsome posts that can be found on the-100-meta-library are not on my personal blogand vice versa.

  You alsomentioned that “there's also no such thing as arguing it's canon [...]” when itcomes to certain aspects or opinions, and you are absolutely right with that. That’swhy we can take these aspects and discuss them freely, yet within the limits ofa respectful exchange. 

It alsodoesn’t make a certain opinion absolutely right or absolutely wrong. And ourreblog is not meant as being an authoritative voice that says “You have tobelieve what is written here”; instead, it is more saying “Hey, look at thispoint of view. Maybe it’s compelling enough for you to change or revise some ofyour previous ideas/opinions about a character or theme. If not, that’s alsookay.”

The only casewhere we will take authoritative action is, as repeatedly stated, by refrainingfrom reblogging any metas that can be considered as hateful or offensive. So ifwe have the impression that someone’s meta is offensive by being lesbophobic,biphobic, racist, biased in their relgious belief, etc., we won’t reblog it.

However,and I hope that everyone who follows the-100-meta-library knows that as well, Iwant you to be aware that criticism on a theme/a character/a character’sbehaviour doesn’t equal an overall hate for certain aspects of that character. Orto be a bit more precise in regard to your ask, that the writer of the meta islesbophobic and thus advocates that view in their meta.

If a writerargues about someone’s style of leadership for example, it doesn’t have to doanything with the leader’s sexual orientation; unless the writer should makethat connection in their meta. And you can bet that if that would be the case,I wouldn’t reblog that post as such a claim is ridiculous.

To come toa close:

I reallyhope that you see that I take it serious what you tell me, if my almost novelas a reply is not already indication enough for that. It seems to me that youalso like the idea of an archive as long as it is done thoughtfully; One reasonwhy you wrote those asks, I assume, and why I admire you as well for thataction. 

And I canalso understand when you still have some reservations about my qualification “tohandle archiving clexa/lexa meta.”

 So howabout making a deal? I try to post some Lexa/Clexa metas in the next few weeksand if you like to, you can either write me here (excluding my co-librarian) ormessage me on my personal blog and tell me if I did good or not.

You canalso link me to some metas you think of as being good and I will take a look atthem to get an impression of your ideas, probably even reblogging them.

 I willleave it up to you what to do next. Thank you for your ask and maybe I willhear of you again with less worry then. :)

[tempestaurora]

I don't know if Briller broke up or not because it wasn't explicitly stated but if they really did, isn't that kinda ooc for Bryan? He knows there's a big chance that, despite their solutions and plans for survival, all of them might only have two more months to live and like ????? Is this really a good time to be having fights or big crisis in your relationship? Would he really want to spend what's left of their time away from Miller when they were planning on growing old together last season?

I see where you’re coming from, but I don’t think any of that (the corn etc) was really on Bryan’s mind.

First, Bryan had no knowledge of there being only two months left. At the time, they assumed six. We have to assume now that he knows, even though he wasn’t in the last episode.

Second, walking away from Miller during that argument is super in character Bryan, and I’ll be happy to explain why, because I love talking about him. (You can find my original Bryan/Briller meta here, and it’s basically just about what I could discern of their relationship during season three.)

What we know of Bryan isn’t much, but we know that he is hardcore, wrapped in a puppy. I say this because Bryan, it’s safe to say, has killed. Long before Polis. He has killed because his entire station was wearing the outfits of Ice Nation - people they would have had to kill to get to this point, to have their clothes, and to survive. Bryan would have killed to save his people - something that a lot of people on this show do.

He’s wrapped in a puppy because - you have seen him, right? He just looks gentle and kind and good, and he was worried that he was the bad thing for Miller back in season two, and he rushed to Riley as soon as he saw him. Also with the floppy hair and the smile it’s just difficult not to love him okay. Hardcore wrapped in a puppy.

Keep that in mind.

Bryan will fight to keep his people safe. He’s done it before, and he did it again when he voted to set off the bomb. No, not only that: he suggested setting off the bomb. It was his idea to save the slaves. It was his idea to just plain out attack the Ice Nation to get into the station. He will do what it takes, and he fights for what he believes in: and that seems to be saving his people and keeping them safe.

If we’re splitting couples into head and heart, Miller is the head, Bryan is the heart. He didn’t let anything else overshadow his need to save his friends. He didn’t think about the water and how they could suffer in the future - he thought about the people suffering right now. He wanted to help them now.

So when he asks Miller if he thought that saving the slaves was the right thing to do, and Miller says no, this is meaningful. Not in just the sense that these people are Bryan’s people; these are his friends and family - but in the sense that this is a fundamental position of Bryan; something that makes him who he is - the fact that he’s the heart, not the head. In relationships with these sorts of people, head and heart work together - but only after having issues and butting heads because of the differing opinions (see Bellamy and Clarke).

Right now, Bryan and Miller are just butting heads because their priorities don’t exactly line up. Miller’s priorities are living in the future, Bryan’s are deserving to live right now. (You might have noticed, as I have throughout writing this, that Bryan and Miller seem to reflect a lot of other relationships back at us.) I truly think they did not break up in 4.02 (I think that was the episode), and it was a fight; a meaningful one, yes, but a fight all the same.

(Remember that whilst Bellamy and Clarke only took about ¾ episodes to get to an agreement, they only knew each other when thrown into a high stress situation, both as leaders. Miller and Bryan aren’t leaders - and their relationship before the ground would’ve been fairly simple. They’re hitting their butting heads period now because this is the first time a serious situation has come up - especially one they both feel strongly about, and one they’re not going to move on. In the Pike debacle, lives weren’t immediately at stake, and Bryan was willing to change sides. This isn’t the case anymore.)

I don’t know what they plan to do in the rest of the season with Briller, as there’s a lot of different directions they could go. But, hopefully, the writers have chosen to show them working past their issues (just like Bellamy and Clarke did back in season 1, as they do seem to be reflecting them - and I’ve spoken before about some similarities between Bellamy and Bryan) and leading them to both being saved from the radiation.

They want that future together, they do. Just because they had a fight doesn’t mean either has gone nope nada don’t want that anymore. They want that future with the chickens, the corn, the house by the lake - and whilst it’s far less likely, what with the end of the world coming, their differing opinions don’t mean that they’re going to stop being together - especially when long standing relationships, like theirs, have a track record of getting past issues.

Besides, I think there was an important line from Bryan in 4.02. When Miller asked why Bryan turned against Pike, Bryan said “I did it for you, Nate”.

They may oppose each other as head and heart, but their number one priority, I think we’ve seen, is each other.

[severus-snaps]

thanks for the additions!! I have some additional thoughts (ofc) on some of your points and this is so much fun to discuss:

it's not enough just to see someone's thoughts - you must be able to interpret them too, ie. have a good understanding of that person and what those thoughts might mean to them, what that person's perspective is etc. In short, you need to be empathetic enough to understand a person in order to interpret their thoughts. This also indicates to me that Snape was both a very good judge of character...

I think Voldemort absolutely had that sort of skill to know how best to 'read' (and manipulate) people; he could be charming, and popular, and offered different things to different people - and withheld different things from different people as punishment (there's also a really good meta somewhere, I think it was this one but I've not recently read the whole thing, about Voldemort and the Death Eaters as a sort of cult rather than a political movement that I think discusses this). I feel like this ties into how he uses Legilimency, but I'd need someone with a brain that cares for more than just Snape to verify if I'm on the right track

I did also have a (longer bit of) section that I lost somewhere about Voldemort's handicaps in terms of not understanding love and empathy, which I think really ties into this in terms of what Snape would've chosen to present, because...

as you say, it shows that Snape has exceptionally good theory of mind. He'd know what to present, and how best to present it, because he knows how Voldemort might interpret it in turn (they'd be absolutely brutal in a game of chess)

unrelated to everything, but just had a moment where I imagined Ron and Snape in a "Snape lives" fic playing chess and Ron insists on wearing mirror sunglasses because he's convinced that Snape's cheating by using Legilimency but Snape's actually just really good at interpreting what people might do

Sort of related to that, I've decided this is a mix of learnt skill, pattern recognition, or hyperempathy, as I headcanon Snape as autistic and he clearly lacked such skills as a child if his early interactions with Lily and the others are anything to go by

And sort of related to that, I feel that Voldemort might have been the one to teach Snape. We know he applies for a Spy position at Hogwarts on Voldemort's orders, we can infer that he kept a reasonably low profile until then. So why wouldn't the world's greatest Legilimens, in line with this, teach his potential spy (one with a slight natural ability at Legilimency and daddy issues a mile wide to exploit for the low low cost of light praise) how best to gather information covertly? Which leads me to this:

legilimency is often denoted through the description of a character's eyes boring into another's. This would indicate that Snape read Harry's mind well before he taught him Occlumency

Firmly agree; this is my favourite on the topic, and I keep thinking about Snape's glimmering eyes in this context

However, we're lead by the narrative to think that Legilimency can be perceived, because the thought being observed floats to the front of the person's consciousness - which happens sometimes, but not others. I don't have anything interesting to say about this, other than: ???

I also don't have anything interesting, but I do have a theory: minds are like onions, and they have layers

I'm joking, but only just. Legilimency can be, I think, done to different depths. (the following titles are just for effect, I haven't given it much thought before writing it so bear with)

Skimming: very surface level skimming of the mind, just a vibe check (how Snape does in early books with glimmering, boring, or otherwise described "meeting" eyes, how Dumbledore's 'twinkle' sometimes). This has no discernable effect on the person being skimmed, other than Harry gets the uncomfortable idea that Snape can read minds and that Dumbledore knows more than he should - but Harry doesn't, as far as I can tell, take this any more seriously than the average person would

'Hearing': When Snape and Harry 'duel' I don't remember there being any indication other than Snape repeatedly blocking Harry's spells that Harry could tell, or feel it, exactly - but Snape knew what words (or intentions?) were forming anyway. I like to think that if thoughts are especially clear - incantations being a good example, as they require some focus - then words can 'pop out' and be "mind read" (which Snape would hate being called that :P). I also like to headcanon that Snape, as part of his natural ability, sometimes heard people's insults even when they were left unsaid, if the thought were salient enough. Imagine in school all the girls thinking you're ugly and you can hear them even when they haven't said a word, or like a Pottermore (I think) article said he could feel Lily's budding attraction to James even if she never said (Also: "The intensity of (Snape's) gaze made her blush." makes me think it might have happened there) :'(

Invading: Snape casting Leglilimens with his wand during lessons, but only catching glimpses of Harry's life/memories. Harry can sense it, feel it, he hates it. There's a physical reaction, Harry reacts without meaning to, full-bodily, to defend himself - but it might not have been as upsetting if it were anyone else; he hates Snape, and Snape hates him, so it was probably a worse experience than usual, because...

Seeking: Snape summoning the mental image of Advanced Potions. Harry didn't react nearly as strongly physically as when Snape was "invading", but to me this is more invasive than passive viewing of memories. It's more intentional, goal-directed, and much more likely to get you into trouble. This is probably what Voldemort is doing to Snape, only Snape is sat casually at Malfoy Manor, letting him into his mind, not resisting (as such) as Voldemort does the equivalent of Googling "traitorous thoughts" inside Snape's head

Planting words/thoughts: Voldemort speaking to many minds at once, speaking to Harry, like at the Battle of Hogwarts

Planting visions: Much more complex, Voldemort planting scenes of Sirius being taken hostage in OotP

I expect you could do more with more power, like planting intentions/actions or mental torture, making things like the Imperius and Cruciatus Curses near obsolete. Loki's speech in Avengers comes to mind:

"I won’t touch Barton. Not until I make him kill you. Slowly. Intimately. In every way he knows you fear. And then he’ll wake just long enough to see his good work, and when he screams, I’ll split his skull."

Legilimency & Occlumency & Emotion

i was reading something somewhere (possibly on my binge of metas last night, but who knows) that Snape was very talented at Occlumency, but just about average at Legilimency - but I respectfully disagree, and here's a whole (3k word) accidental ramble about it, which started as an observation and devolved into how I think Legilimency/Occlumency works in the context of Snape and Voldemort, and why I interpret it differently than it being (entirely) magical dissociation and actually quite an emotion-based skill once it's more complex TLDR: I've often seen Occlumency described/conceptualised as a "shield" or some kind of suppressed emotionless state, but I discovered upon writing this that I think it can be quite a bit more complex and emotional, actually - just like Snape <3

Snape's Talents

The idea that got me rambling today went something like "Draco, who only had a handful of lessons from Bellatrix, was able to keep Snape out of his mind using Occlumency - so Snape can't have been a very good Legilimens, or Occlumency was easy to do"

And I do agree that Snape was probably better at Occlumency than Legilimency by sheer quantity of practice alone - and also that, outside of using it on Harry (and Draco) when they were up to mischief, and Snape likely wishing he could use it to work out what Dumbledore was hiding from him, Snape had no desire to see, hear, interpret or otherwise get the gist of what anyone at Hogwarts was thinking - but especially not a bunch of pubescent students, nor colleagues who liked him on a surface level but obviously were not close enough to think Something Was Up when he killed Dumbledore (which, fair in some ways, unfair in others, but I digress)

[side note: Snape can't have just not used Occlumency for over a decade before Voldemort's return, so I like to think of him and Dumbledore practicing to keep his skills sharp - although I expect that would be another 'fun' way for Dumbledore to hold Snape in chains which would make for an interesting fic]

I suspect that if Snape had chosen to, he could've invaded Draco's mind in that scene, broken through whatever defenses Draco used - but that's not a very Snape thing to do to a student, and especially not one he knows well, was a family friend of, has closely seen grow up, and probably has a soft spot for. It's very reminiscent of his conversation with Narcissa, to me. Throughout that entire conversation with Draco, Snape was trying to comfort Draco, empathise with him, get Draco to trust him, confide in him, offer support to Draco whether he wanted it or not - not further alienate him to a point where Snape couldn't help. And besides, invading Draco's mind aggressively doesn't sit very well with his vow "to the best of your ability, protect him from harm".

And as for Harry's lessons, Harry was using spells - which Snape seemed surprised, interested, and almost impressed to learn that were effective against Legilimency, which isn't surprising in itself as it's not a widely used area of magic. And since Harry had no idea that Snape (and probably Dumbledore) were 'reading his mind' for years before he learnt about Legi/Occlumency, I don't expect many people would know if Snape used it, or put up a fight using those methods - other Death Eaters probably stuck to Occluding, because it would hardly garner any favour if they cast a stinging hex or Protego at Voldemort or in a DE meeting Which brings me back to my other point as well, which was that "Occlumency possibly wasn't difficult to do". On a rudimentary level that might be true (at least insofar as any advanced magic was difficult to do - Harry was actually quite talented, e.g. casting a corporeal patronus at 13/14 or whatever, and Draco could do it after a few lessons with Bellatrix). Harry learnt almost despite Snape, because he didn't take instruction from him well and because Snape is (intentionally) abrasive in lessons (which I could go on about, since Snape couldn't really be nice to Harry when Voldemort was possibly looking through harry's eyes at any given moment - and as other metas have pointed out was another layer to Snape's rage when Harry looked at his memories). But Snape could do it without a wand, without an incantation, so he was reasonably skilled - imagine casting a full body Patronus or other impressive spell with neither a wand nor an incantation

Also we don't know precisely how long Draco had lessons for, it might have been loads and he was actually pretty good, or it might have been 3 and he was awful. But unlike Snape, who is not the greatest Legilimens of all time (that's apparently Voldemort?), it was glaringly obvious to him that Draco was using Occlumency - Snape had him sussed in like 3 seconds, and chose not to go any further for the reasons I outlined above - which interestingly he did not do with Harry, when faced with finding out where Harry learnt Sectumsempra (but at that point both Snape and Draco's life had been on the line - if Draco dies, presumably so does Snape?)

Which brings me back to Snape... How I think Legilimency/Occlumency works (sometimes)

You have no subtlety The mind is a complex and many-layered thing It is true, however, that those who have mastered Legilimency are able, under certain conditions, to delve into the minds of their victims and to interpret their findings correctly. The Dark Lord, for instance, almost always knows when somebody is lying to him. Only those skilled at Occlumency are able to shut down those feelings and memories that contradict the lie, and so utter falsehoods in [Voldemort's] presence without detection.

There's a lot to take in there, and also pretty ballsy to say to Voldemort-by-proxy (Harry), which might reduce the validity of my idea that Snape didn't want to be nice to Harry during their lessons in case Voldemort was watching, since Snape's pretty happy to give Voldemort (and the reader, more likely) a complete insight into what he's himself doing... although I expect that Voldemort has considered this, and also doesn't recognise the limits of his own power - or the extent of Snape's.

I also wonder whether the 'certain conditions' are something simple, like eye contact being made or the spell being cast, or whether there's something to the mental state of the 'caster' at the time as well, like there is with Occlumency walls/shields and being calm and empty-headed, or whether the conditions is the Occluder themselves presenting (or not presenting) some alternative things to interpret. One of the wizarding world (I think) pages says Snape trained a 'slight natural ability', so that makes me wonder more, as well, but i digress.

But my second point is this: Snape's talents weren't Occluding by total shutdown, or Occlumency 'shields' which always now irk me in fanfiction (this I'm definitely drawing from another meta but I have no idea where, so... apologies). Snape wasn't throwing up a wall in front of entire memories or thoughts, for the most part. Although I expect that between the Pensieve and Draco's example use of Occlumency, that was sometimes a function (e.g. some of the things Dumbledore told Snape to pass along, he'd have to entirely block out, alter, or otherwise adapt those memories to make it look as though Snape had passed information along of his own volition against Dumbledore's orders, or hide the fact that he'd helped Dumbledore when he was supposed to be helping Voldemort, etc).

So inkeeping with my own questionable metaphor, where Draco threw up a wall - metaphorically crumbling, last-minute, cowboy builder Occlumency where the wall would hold but you could see it very clearly and obviously; where with a lesser Occlumens the wall was nice enough, but you could see where the paint job didn't quite match up and the plastering wasn't done very evenly; Snape had the whole house set up so that you didn't know the wall wasn't there from the start, and probably had a few artfully chosen scuffs to make it seem real, or it was some kind of trapdoor under the carpet. (okay the metaphor died, but I've been watching a lot of remodelling shows lately, you get the point if you've read this far)

In another metaphor I imagine detecting a lie to be like running your fingertips along a smooth surface and finding a lip or a bump - you could then, pick at it, poke at it, tear it open. You could sense that something was being hidden, or withheld. But there were no lips or snags in Snape's thoughts; potentially Voldemort could simply not detect them, not even when he searched him openly, repeatedly, full eye contact, at the table at Malfoy Manor. Snape welcomed Voldemort into his (it's just occurred to me, but "mind palace") and Voldemort repeatedly, for years, could not tell that anything was amiss, and presumably Voldemort did this with much more ferocity (and skill) than Snape looking at Harry for 2 seconds and immediately summoning Harry's mental image of the Prince's copy of Advanced Potions Making

But it can't be down to detection alone. There's also a level of interpretation to Legilimency. So here I'm focusing on a more interesting aspect to me, which is how emotion is used in Legilimency/Occlumency. Obviously, Snape isn't Occluding all the time, and as much as I adore Alan Rickman, book!Snape was naturally a total petty, stuttering mess (love him for it) who only wishes he had Alan Rickman's gravitas, and could on occasion emulate it.

I told you to empty yourself of emotion! … Fools who wear their hearts proudly on their sleeves, who cannot control their emotions, who wallow in sad memories and allow themselves to be provoked this easily — weak people, in other words — they stand no chance against his powers!

I think this quote is interesting for many reasons I probably won't be able to connect properly and are in no particular order beyond how I thought of them

Snape is emotional here when he says it, he's angry, annoyed, upset, and it's an honest feeling, and he's obviously not devoid of emotion but can still Occlude Harry

Snape is an emotional person, much as he tries to pretend not to be, and can still Occlude Voldemort just fine even on the night he thinks he's marching to his death at the end of GoF

Much like how many other kinds of magic require lots of study and a strong emotion/will/conscious thought at the start, perhaps it become easier with experience to the point where this advice is not essential (e.g. kind of like driving, I no longer have to think about changing gears like I did as a Learner)

Snape is also talking about himself here, indicative of Snape's worldview where showing 'weak' emotions is the problem - soft emotions, vulnerability, "never tell".

"Provoke" is exactly what Voldemort does to Harry

This is Occlumency 101; Snape's teaching Harry the most basic of Occlumency - to compartmentalise, to block someone out, to throw up that shoddy but sturdy-enough wall for Voldemort to come up against, like Draco did to Snape. Harry's anger and emotion is a weakness in this basic Occlumency lesson, where Voldemort is trying to look through Harry and/or trick/provoke him; thus, the wall.

But this probably isn't the kind of Legilimency Voldemort would use on Snape (which is to see if he's lying, if his information is real, if his values are aligned, etc), and it probably isn't the kind of Occlumency Snape was doing in return, to lie or deflect suspicion or ingratiate himself. In fact, throwing up a wall is the opposite of what Snape does with Voldemort; Snape lets him in, lets him stare him down in front of an audience, all the while showing Voldemort what he wants to see. I think as well there's an element of a Legilimens 'grasping' for something, searching, "provoking", like how Snape 'grasped' for Harry's memories of Advanced Potions Making, how Voldemort appears to search Snape at Malfoy Manor - so if all Snape presents is a memory, empty, devoid of any complexity, Voldemort would question it.

In my interpretation, when Occluding, Snape displays a different type of emotional control; Complex Occlumency means you control your emotions, yes, but not block them off - Snape takes his emotions where they need to go, makes them do what they need to do, to support the interpretation he wants Voldemort to reach. He chooses to some extent what Voldemort sees if he lies outright or omits details (a well made wall, basic Occlumency), and chooses how to present it (complex Occlumency). And he does it with subtlety; he doesn't often outright lie, and there's a lot left to interpretation - in both Snape's speech (with Bellatrix) and his actions throughout the books, and presumably his Occlumency.

So I suggest that Snape, in a situation with Voldemort, must be able to "lift up" or "lean into" an alternative emotion for interpretation - the decoration around the wall, the interior design, if you will. For example, Snape couldn't tell Voldemort that he desired Lily, in a total absence of any feelings at all, without it coming across as false and thus easily detectable as a lie. And you know that when a young Snape, who's hardly made a name for himself (Snape's likely never killed, at least, and isn't especially memorable to anyone in Azkaban and is last named by Karkaroff, and other things I won't go into here) outside of overhearing half a prophecy begs for a Mudblood Order member who's the mother of Voldemort's downfall who's thrice defied him to be spared, you can bet that Voldemort will want to thoroughly find out why, so...

To me this suggests that there was a level of desire there that Snape could 'lean into', whether that desire be for Lily or someone else he found desirable to act as a kind of substitute - though given that Legilimency seems to work on mental images and memories at least in part, a memory where he desired Lily would've been useful. And I'm just using that as an example, because Voldemort would also presumably at some stage have interrogated what Snape thought of Dumbledore and Harry, and Snape would've had to lean into feelings of hatred and loathing - which he'd manage just fine for Harry, but Snape would have leant into his feelings after Dumbledore silenced him after nearly getting eaten by a werewolf and again freeing Sirius in PoA, but I digress

When Harry finally learns Occlumency (by his own admission) in the wake of Dobby's death, it's grief that helps him master it - which, for me personally, is not a detached, clear-headed feeling in any sense. It's visceral, emotional, and painful; all-consuming. It's love/grief/loss/strong loving emotion that forces Voldemort out, after he loses Sirius and again when he loses Dobby. But it's a contrast to the emotions Voldemort uses of Harry's to draw Harry out, via his fears for Sirius. But with grief, Harry's dived headfirst into feeling what Voldemort doesn't want to feel (unlike the anger), to keep Voldemort out of his mind. Whereas Snape would do the opposite, and dive right in to the feelings Voldemort would want to sense - to the exclusion of others. Would Voldemort even think to search for Snape's love for Lily, if he was first presented with something more visceral, with more negative connotations, like desire or jealousy, hurt or betrayal? These are the emotions Voldemort thrives on and can exploit, that he's familiar with, that he understands. In the context then of 'grasping' that's how I think Snape leads Voldemort down a path of believing him - by bringing honest 'negative' emotions to the fore that Voldemort understands.

this is really where I think skilled Occlumency differs from dissociation or wall-building. I think Snape would simultaneously have to dampen his 'lie' feelings and to raise the volume on the 'fitting' feelings for his chosen interpretation. My interpretation of this all stems from my experience of writing, of getting lost in music, in using those activities to "wallow" in certain feelings. Snape does not present Voldemort with his true feelings, but they are real feelings. So in that way, I feel Snape was like an artist or writer; he felt deeply, he felt conflictingly, and dived headfirst into those wells of emotion when he needed to - diving so deeply that it cuts off and hides the conflicting evidence. I feel that when I'm writing, when I'm listening to music, when I'm wallowing. And I feel a lot of sympathy for Snape, because it can feel like a real whiplash when you're midway through writing an intense scene or listening to some excellent music that really fills you up with something, it can take you to some dark places, and it's quite shocking somehow when abruptly interrupted - which would be what his life was constantly like after Voldemort's return, leaning into and shying away from/shutting down emotions and memories he didn't necessarily feel whenever he was called, and then having to return to work or meetings in that headspace, where everything feels out of touch and you're in internal turmoil. (Granted, I can snap out of it because the music or the writing is neither here nor there, really, but he'd be doing it with his own life experiences, with his own life on the line, and to repay a debt of guilt - there's a lot more emotional baggage there, and even more once Dumbledore died). And I think it would take its toll in other ways, too, which leads me to Lily...

Far from some people's cries that possessive or obsessive attraction or desire is some huge moral failing, I'd argue that you'll find a level of it in most teenagers and indeed the regular spectrum of human emotion - I know I've certainly experienced feelings of intense jealousy and whatever 'Snaters' (I'm not a massive fan of the term, but as a shorthand) accuse Snape of, whether I acted on it or not. So I'd suggest that Snape 'leant into' that for the sake of being on the receiving end of Voldemort's Legilimency. Whether Snape regularly, or actually, felt those emotions of his own free will or not is hard to say - since there's no actual evidence he did act possessive or jealous beyond the normal teenager level (and that's without addressing the fact that we didn't know how he would've ended the sentence "I won't let you -"). And I'd also go as far as to say that Snape probably, truly, had some awful thoughts (don't we all?) and so he was able to lean into some very dark and gloomy nooks and crannies of his mind, the parts we're told healthy people steer clear of acting on but also undoubtedly experience (jealousy, possession, rage, bitterness) in much the same way as a writer, artist, or musician might, to make his 'lies' and the stories he told more 'truthful' - which was why Voldemort trusted him so much.

TLDR: Snape's a man of many contraditions and very much emotional depth, and he manipulated his own emotions (likely to the detriment of his mental health) for years. But just as I, a fanfic writer, can vicariously experience the bitter resentment for a person who doesn't love me, can imagine a world where he can think those thoughts, embody them, and still not take them on as part of his identity.

anyway i don't have a conclusion, I just had thoughts

[Side note not strictly related to ANY of the above: I find it interesting as well that Voldemort's skill is apparently specifically in working out whether people are lying to him, suggesting that you could specialise even further into different aspects of behaviour. But people do lie to Voldemort (Narcissa, Snape, off the top of my head, but there's no indication of Voldemort using Legilimency on Narcissa in that moment where Harry lives - Voldemort was too elated, once again caught up in his own glory). [side side note: Harry's treatment after his 'death' does make me wonder, briefly, about Snape's own treatment when he returned at the end of GoF - public torture and humiliation, an opportunity for the other DEs to turn on one of their own to 'increase their own standing' in Voldemort's eyes, crucio to weaken Snape's defences, to check that his information and loyalty true? i get the impression that Snape shared his information with Voldemort privately, given that Bellatrix didn't seem to know much about Snape's return, but who's to say there wasn't some 'fun' beforehand, or at other points during his time as spy]