#i love that in this game everyone can have a different interpretation of a character and like no one can tell you that you are wrong. lol

[meo-eiru]

I kinda like the small yet big detail in the game, like I'm sure myself and some other people were expecting a wholesome dating sim that would also get quite spicy (FROM HOW WE KNOW MERU)

And we all just kinda got kicked in the butt, like Starling being too hot to be true yet so terrifying at the same time, but not the terrifying kind that we know, like Micah or Silas etc

More like the type that makes you forget that he still is more a siren than a merman, like he successfully managed to lure in the whole community with his hot ass😭😭and then we get backstabbed by him munching our fingers off as if they're some carrots, like as a simple lunch snack-💀💀

Or in the other ending where it's basically simply Mae dying and getting turned into a possession and probably just another body to fill up with tongues

From my interpretation, Starling doesn't really have that kind of romantic interest in Mae, but she kinda thought it could go into that direction, but then got stabbed in the back like that😭😭(probs everyone who played it, thought like Mae there too kinda💀so we all got the betrayal🙁)

And you guys did a really good job in simply catching us all off guard in most scenes, it's it's beautifully written and drawn, I love that game so much!!!

Spoilers for the game

Honestly maybe Sel would give a different answer but I do think Starling likes Maelyn. Due to his past and what he has now become his way of showing it is probably different, but for Starling I don't think Maelyn is just another body for storing tongues. If that was the case he wouldn't have went out of his way to clean her body up, find a wedding dress and "marry" her in his own makeshift way.

He probably didn't even view it as a betrayal. Because until the very end Starling was making sure the no longer breathing Maelyn could be comfortable in her pearl necklace.

For the writing style, probably Sel writing the story played a big part in this.

Sel and I have very similar tastes in a lot of things, on levels I myself can't believe sometimes. But we do have a different style at how we depict similar concepts.

I love presenting dark stories on a silver platter. Prettied up with the most delicious icings and shiniest sprinkles. I like my stories and characters to look beautiful. Enjoy them while thinking you're just having whimsy adventures only to realize you're done for once you truly look. Like Silas. It's easy to make fun of him, forget the things he is capable of doing as you're too busy enjoying his silliness. He feels safe, a gentle giant who loves and takes care of you.

But he's still a man who has forced himself on you not only physically but also mentally. Trapped and limited you beyond belief. No electricity, no internet, no contact with anyone other than him. Only talking to him, only feeling him, only knowing him, only consuming him. A beautiful and sweet man no human mind can handle for more than a few weeks.

But Sel, from what I've seen, is a bit different. She doesn't shy away from showing the darkness and scariness of the stories she makes. Before you even know it you'll be facing concepts you didn't think could be possible.

And not only that, she hides so much under every word she uses. Often times the things she places in front of you are not even the scariest parts. The more you read and the more you decipher they get deeper.

I'm frankly a big fan of the things she writes. They often leave me flabbergasted (and mortified, she knows what I mean) but they are also so so fun. So scary yet beautifully poetic.

I know she doesn't like being under the spotlight that much. But ever since I met her and saw her stories I wanted more people to get the chance to see and appreciate them the way they deserved. I think they are truly special, and they make me want to do my best to illustrate them in the perfect way possible.

Honestly I'm not sure if I'm good enough at it, but if it helps the stories reach more people I'm happy with it.

I don't know if she'll read this post so that's why I'm being sappy like this but I genuinely hope you guys like her stories like I do. And I hope both you and I can see more and more of it.

[greyedian]

.

[sokoe]

A question for sims 2 players! I've recently started playing the Goths and i wonder.

[triglycercule]

i think the creators in the undertale multiverse is SUCH a creative concept and even though it's fourth wall breaking it's so amazing that it deserves to break the fourth wall

everytime other medias and games or stories break the fourth wall it's either taken unseriously (like pinkie pie from mlp or family guy cutaways) or people shit on it for being out of place and just a deus ex machina or something (hi3 i will NEVER hate you for including the players in the final arc) but the undertale multiverse completely subverts that. actually the entire MULTIVERSE is BASED on the concept that people are willing to make media and art and writing and that is what keeps these ocs and worlds and creations going and alive

the utmv isn't even a real thing. like it's not a fandom that spawned from a book or a movie or a show or game or comic. ok well it technically is but the undertale fandom and the undertale AUs fandon are two different things i think. like undertale aus ofc came from undertale but that's a whole seperate branch of things and sometimes those aus have NOTHING to do with undertale (looking at you dreamtale. and others.)

but the fact that a whole seperate branch of a fandom was created just because people wanted to expand on one tiny game and had so much love for it that it spawned this clusterfuck of a fandom is just so amazing to me. i don't think any other fandom has THIS extensive of a multiverse with aus where the people holding the pencils and typing words are so heavily engrained into the lore (ink and error i will forever love you for being aware of creators I AM AWARE OF YOU TOO!!! I LOVE YOU!!!!)

in other fandoms there's a strict canon for medias but in the utmv a lot of aus are just a brief concept and maybe some charactization and that's it (dusttale ily 4 this. dusttale is peak fiction). and if you like the concept enough you can make another concept based on it. and if someone else likes your au enough they might make another au based on it or write headcanons for it. and it's so cool that this fandom is kinda self sustaining in a way. undertale's probably never gonna get another update or game and even though deltarune has its connections its a completely seperate thing. but somehow the fandom is alive and still pumping out tons of amazing content

and the fact that we control all of these character's actions is so daunting but also so cool. like these characters do these things because we basically script them to do. we as creators are the ones drawing the angst or writing the shit posts. if a character is self aware of the creators that's just because we MADE them aware. so are they really aware or are we just pretending that we are. if a character is powerful that's just because we made them powerful. if a character hates the creators we made them hate us. if a character destroys aus we make them do that. but they don't actually feel that way or do those things, that's just what we tell them to do and i think that's really cool

ive yapped a lot about this topic (i still have so much more to say) but i'll hold it back and just talk about one last thing and that's headcanons and interpretations. I LOVE PEOPLE'S INDIVIDUAL INTERPRETATIONS!!! I LOVE PEOPLE'S HEADCANONS FOR CHARACTERS!!! i love seeing how other people think the mtt (or other characters but i am a murder time trio fanatic) would interact or how they would act. i love seeing people's dumb comics of them bickering or making out (errrmmmmm) because it's all different. all these people came up with their own ideas and thoughts on how to expand these relatively basic concepts and it's all different because everyone's different and gone through different things <333

all in all i love you undertale multiverse. this fandom is one of the most unique i've ever had the joy of being in and i hope it never dies out (if it dies out what will happen to all of the amazing creations and worlds and people we've made 😕😕😕 ink will be sad. so pls don't die utmv)

[docmerlin]

the more i think about it, the more "i was a teenage exocolonist" is The relationship game for me. like it's so aro, ace, relationship anarchy friendly it's unbelievable.

romance and sex are there but there's no big advantage to pursuing them in the game, except some extra little scenes for dates & maybe a different blurb for your partner(s) of choice at the end. you get the same relationship progression with everyone no matter what. characters you build relationships with treat you the same whether you're dating or friends or fuck buddies or some fourth thing. the scene where you have a sleepover and cuddle and talk about how important you are to each other isn't locked off just because you're not dating. you can say no to sexual situations with someone you are dating and it doesn't negatively affect anything. romance, dating, and sex don't affect the overall plot at all, they're just there as a little extra thing. relationships don't exist on an escalator from strangers > friends > romance, it's just like 1-10 of how close you are, and for me that's just 😘👌

i think a lot of this is a product of the game being so complex & the creators not being able to account for EVERY variable in a playthrough so they made things more vague, but to me it's a feature, and one of my favorites at that. i love that my partners of choice don't prioritize me over their existing relationships. i love that i can see 4 different 10-heart scenes in a single run and give all 4 characters a happy ending while not having dated anyone (though i may have had sex with a couple of them, for funsies). you can play it however you want, interpret the scenes and relationships however you want, and that's so ideal for me & my experience. i just love this game and its relationship mechanics so so much

[pointlesschairjokes]

A Needlessly In depth Analysis of the Hypnos Subplot thus far

So, the new update is out and my sleepy boy has gotten his own story moment. I have... concerns. Going purely off of dialog I'm worried the subplot is going to simply be comic relief. The joke set-up has been obvious. Mel thinks Hypnos is wise and powerful, everyone else is being sarcastic because they know he's a lazy goof. Hypnos wakes up, Mel's image of him is shattered, cue laughter. On the one hand, I would personally find that resolution disappointing because I'd like to see more done with his character, but on the other, I hold out hope because a purely comedic subplot just wouldn't make sense. I've seen comments here and there saying Hypnos must just be conked out cause Hades and Nyx aren't there to scold him, and if this were to be pure comedy that'd probably be the case. But, if there is one thing Hades 1 makes clear, even if you interpret Hypos' character in the shallowest possible way, he cares very deeply for those he loves. When he drops his cheerful tone to ask Than to spend more time with him, it is distinct, and he nearly tears up calling Zag his best friend. I simply do not buy that he would choose to sleep for years when it means being separated from his friends and family. But then again, the first games treatment of him was just a bit odd. The only time him being the god of sleep is relevant is a single line of flashback narration where we learn he's able to put the entire house, including Hades, to sleep. For the rest of the game no character acknowledges that it makes sense for the god of sleep to be sleepy, and his keepsake, the coin purse, has nothing to do with his aspect or his character. I really hope the subplot goes in a direction of addressing that disconnect. So as to what we actually have so far: the dream scene. A lot of what we see is fairly easy to interpret, Than is there resting close to Hypnos, Hypnos is surrounded by massive stacks of work with an angry Hades looming in the background. Now this is a bit interesting, as in the first game Hypnos appears oblivious to Hades anger in his interactions with him. Perhaps this is evidence that some of that cheeriness is a defense mechanism, its hard to say, but its clear that Hypnos feels overworked. I feel its also important that Mel remarks how unusual it is that he is still asleep inside the dream. Given that, and given that there's a craftable item involved, I suspect that the scenery of the dream is going to be different each time Mel uses the dream vapors. There may even be a puzzle involving the character cutouts. As for why Hypnos is asleep, its still unclear. Could it be exhaustion due to overwork? Possibly, although it wouldn't be the most satisfying answer. I'm actually a bit reluctant to say its Chronos' doing. None of his magic seems to operate in a way that would make sense in Hypnos' case. I'll throw out one wild theory though, that its actually the Fates who have put him to sleep. We know from the prophecy list that Mel is going to locate them at some point in the story, and thus far its completely unclear how. If she can communicate with them in dreams however... What could be a better ace in the hole than a god who not only is underestimated by everyone, but who's also in an 'eternal' slumber?

[nixmori]

Astarion x Wren

The Lovers Tarot: upright

A fun pass time for me is always thinking which tarot card fits the characters at different parts of the story, and the primary themes that govern them.

Wren (my primary Tav) is the reversed lovers card for much of her early story/game. She longs for connection but is met with a cold, detached world, resulting in mental imbalance and the absence of self-love. She’s lonely and insecure, fearing rejection. Her closest relationship up until the events of the game was with her patron—the capricious (but not malicious) Archfey Kol. He offered her power and the pretense of connection, but never anything real.

For Astarion, while I think another card represents himself (I’m keeping that to myself because I have another art planned around it!) I feel his struggle aligns well with the devil card. He is, of course, more than figuratively shackled to Cazador, but also to the years of abuse, trauma, and his own demons born of that time. The shackles depicted in that card are loose—showing they can be broken should the person choose to be free of their demons.

The lovers and the devil cards are mirrors of one another. The lovers shows security and balance, but also the temptation of the fruit and the snake that could lead to back down the road to self destruction. Alternatively, they are a reminder of what it took to come back from that to a harmonious state.

In my interpretation of The Lovers here, I’ve retained the shackles from Astarion’s devil card. He’s chosen a new path—one where he can be true to himself. The scars will always be there, but the chains are broken. I’ve retained the forbidden fruit as Wren’s crown, with the leaves too represent the personal growth of both characters while the berries (fruit) represent the temptations that would have lead them down a very different path (which I will leave out due to spoilers!)

Fun fact, the Angel in the original card art is Raphael! Very different from everyone’s favorite demon in the game. This Raphael represents physical and emotional healing. I didn’t think an Angel would fit the aesthetics of what I wanted so I replaced him with the moon and Polaris. The first reason has to do with Astarion’s spawn ending so I won’t go into it. The second is taken from the moon card itself, where the moon reveals one’s true self. Paired with Polaris, it represents the moon’s light as a guide, as both embark on their long journey of healing. It won’t be an overnight venture—something that can be fixed by a single entity, so the moon as a guide works better in this context, I believe.

As a personal addition, Wren holds a few nerine lilies—a flower that has been associated with freedom since Ancient Greece. They also symbolize unity, and feelings straight from the heart, which felt appropriate for a relationship where both characters started as strangers to emotional intimacy. (I used to be a florist, I HAVE to have my flower symbolism)

Finally, the clouds at the bottom started life as flames, which in the og tarot card represent passion. As the art took form though, they took on the appearance of smoke/clouds. I could have made it more flame-like but I really liked how this looked, but I also think it fits the slow burn the story ended up taking. There’s a fire, somewhere—but it isn’t the most important thing here.

If you made it this far, thanks for reading my essay. I hope it was coherent!

[catfishofoldin99colours]

it's SO interesting seeing how different people react to the story of mouthwashing and how it unfolds, particularly the element of playing as curly and Jimmy

Having seen both gab smolders and jacksepticeye play it now, it's interesting seeing how differently they react to it all

Gab reacts to it similar to how she reacts to most pov horror games she plays, in that she takes the story in stride and the actions of the characters are accepted and interpreted through a lens of understanding that this is a horror story, and everyone is the worst version of themselves. What surprises her the most is just *how* intense the themes and suffering gets, such as the cannabalism and sheer vitriol Jimmy says to curly, but she's not surprised that Jimmy is awful at all. Even him being the main pov character for majority of the game play doesn't necessarily make any reveals about him (he got Anya pregnant, he was the one who crashed the ship) into a lesser being in her head, she's more intrigued by what they reveal about the story. That's not to say she thinks he's great at all, but any information doesn't take him down from a pedestal in her head because she never had one on him in the first place.

Given she loves horror stories and horror games and frequently talks about the horror books she reads, this makes sense. She's primed to come to a horror story knowing it's a tragedy and no one is good and accepts that immediately.

Jack, on the other hand, interprets the lenses of Jimmy as the inherent main character, and he is, but jack takes it as, 'he is the victim the story is happening to' rather than 'he is as much complacent and active in the horrors going on as the story wants to make him experience.' he gives Jimmy a normal voice when reading out his dialogue, and everyone else gets some kind of voice acting - a deviation from the norm, which is immediately Jimmy in his eyes. Even curly gets a rough scratchy voice and through that until jack sees his face, it can inferred jack sees him as the grizzled old man that Jimmy arguably is instead of curly (tho in the wake of most people seeing curly as nothing but a victim and incapable of causing any harm when he very much did, this is kind of refreshing to me).

It's only when Swansea is dead and Jimmy is REALLY descending into madness, that jack considers the idea that Jimmy may be the bad guy, and that in turn, he has been perpetuating many actions that have led to the horrible situation getting worse.

Interestingly, the puzzle - gab, who up until that point has been thoroughly horrified by everything that does happen and how graphic the game has been, seems to find a sort of dissociative comfort in making the pipes line up so curly can digest his own leg. Meanwhile jack cannot stop focusing on the horror of making curly digest his own leg to the point that he takes a while to figure out how the puzzle works to complete it, and eventually settles into a very uncomfortable silence as he makes it work.

It's two really interesting ways that this game has been interpreted and I kinda fucking love thinking about it.

[tobyisave]

Trust & Insecurity in Kiibo & Miu's relationship

(In response to @strawberrysweater ! Thanks for opening this can of worms and sorry for this huge post lmaooo)

To preface this: I do love them together!! I just enjoy looking for the places they might clash at times if they were actually in a relationship... So this is about the things that keep them from fully understanding/trusting each other. And ofc this is just my interpretation!!

My short answer:

(1) Miu only thinks she is valuable as an inventor and sexual object, (2) Most people only care about Kiibo as a scientific novelty, and (3) they both have JUST enough evidence to convince themselves that this is also how they view each other. Even if deep down they're only playing these roles in an attempt to get closer to another human being.

On top of that, even though they're especially vulnerable with each other, I think there's still a lot of misunderstanding between them that would be difficult for them to reconcile. First because they have some genuine points of conflict, and second because they each have problems communicating and reading people (i.e. reality distorting levels of abandonment issues & obligatory robot autism coding, respectively)

Elaboration under the cut:

PART A - Insecurities

You can see (1) and (2) a bit in their other relationships:

Miu is of course hypersexual at all times, and she gives inventions to Shuichi (FTE) and her fantasy lover (love suite) because, as she confesses herself, inventing stuff is the only way she knows how to show affection for other people besides offering them her body.

Her inventions and hypersexuality are also the only explicit points of connection between her and Kokichi, arguably the only other character she is remotely close to besides Kiibo and Shuichi.

So given that most of her onscreen relationship with Kiibo is sexual or scientific (or both) in nature, it’s easy for her to go on believing these are the only things she has to offer. It’s a bit self-fulfilling of course because she’s arguable the one controlling the direction of their relationship in the first place, and at this point I’m not sure she believes there’s anything else to her.

[Shout out to @cloudysonder for helping develop this take :P]

I get the impression Kiibo has met a lot of people over his life who only want to talk about how cool it is that he’s a robot, even though that’s not a part of his identity he initially likes to bring up.

In his FTE with Shuichi, he goes straight into 'demonstrating my functions' mode as if it's the only way he knows how to talk to people

We see him treated in this fetishized way in-game too: with Kokichi chasing him to be “friends with a robot”; with Kaede’s FTE asking him invasive questions and touching his buttons without asking; and in postgame with Kazuichi basically assaulting him and trying to take him apart out of scientific curiosity --- all of these within just his first or second interactions with these people!

So it's a BIG thing for him to willingly let Miu sit there and take him apart, when he already spends so much time fending off virtual strangers who don't respect his bodily autonomy. And he's not used to people taking a genuine interest in him as a person so he’s hesitant to let himself believe Miu is any different, especially when her interest is so explicitly centered around his biology.

Plus as long as Kiibo is physically dependent on Miu, there's going to be a lot of room for insecurity to fester on BOTH sides:

"Does Kiibo really need me or does he just need my technical skills? Does he want to do these favors for me or does he feel like he has to?"

"Does Miu really care who I am or does she just want to gawk at my body like everyone else does? Does she care who I am or am I just the first boy(?) to give her the time of day? Does she want to help me or does she just know she’s the only one who can?"

This is the biggest hurdle IMO because it's a necessarily unbalanced relationship, and it will have to continue for the foreseeable future, no matter how they feel about each other.

PART B - Respect/communication

Another thing is that I don't think they fully respect each other — kind of for the same reason the rest of the group doesn’t respect them either

Miu might not consider Kiibo a person. We know Kiibo was worried about this; when asking Shuichi to use the electrohammer on him he explains, "The outcome will settle once and for all how Miu perceived me." This, and the fact she says robots aren’t people in trial, make me pretty confident that she has never looked him in the eye and said "I consider you a person."

I think she has a complex relationship with Kiibo’s personhood. On one hand if he’s a thing then it’s much easier for her to control him (esp given what we see of their relationship) and this soothes her anxious heart by ensuring that he can’t abandon her.

At the same time, if this is the case, then his coerced/artificial love isn’t worth as much as it would be if it came from an autonomous human person — to her insecure mind, it becomes Miu alone in her room playing boyfriend girlfriend with a doll, if that makes sense. 

To clarify, I’m not saying she BELIEVES he’s just an object, but it’s an idea that both comforts and torments her.

It's worth noting, too, that Miu doesn't always respect people's consent. This is especially risky when you factor in their mechanic-robot relationship (which already comes with a difficult power dynamic) and Kiibo’s naive/somewhat people-pleasing personality.

On Kiibo’s end: I think it’s safe to say he finds her rude/inappropriate at first (though I think it's really sweet that he uses the much more euphemistic description 'brash and spirited' after getting to know her). They also have some pretty stark moral differences --- Kiibo is distraught to learn that Miu wasn't above murdering their classmates, for example.

More importantly, I headcanon he has a lot of difficulty understanding her at all  – on an emotional level, yes, and and on a literal level he just straight up doesn’t understand many of the sentences she says either

K: “Most of that was unintelligible nonsense, but…” after Miu explains her “secret woman weapon." IMO his decision to phrase this as an insult helps mask the fact he's not familiar with all the lewd references she just made

He also has problems understanding emotions from the start, and Miu is DIFFICULT to track because she cycles through emotions so rapidly.

+ he might find it hard to extrapolate that many of the things she does are part of a facade. The crass egotistical miu who says he’s not a person is equally as real to him as the deeply insecure miu wants to believe he is a person (if not more real…)

PART C

Also these bullets from my personal doc I don't have the willpower to expand on atm:

They are both so prone to misinterpreting people unkindly

They’re also both so misled about how committed a relationship is supposed to be. Like I think Kiibo would consider a confession from literally anyone to be tantamount to a proposal (based on his love suite scene). And Miu wouldn’t be quite so fast but i do think it’d still be a huge deal for her because she falls very hard very easily (based on her FTE). Which is all very cute but being plunged into a big commitment like that can be crazy stressful, esp for two teens who have never dated before (imo) and have no frame of reference. [I was actually just going to post about this part lol]

PART D

All that said... I love them together and I DO think they could make it work without too much heartbreak. A lot of the things I describe as problems here could easily be taken as strengths.

e.g. Their misunderstanding of how relationships work ironically makes them more compatible, since they're both ready to go whole hog (if Kiibo determines that he actually likes her that is). Miu's rapidly fluctuating emotions are confusing, but on some level I think he'd admire how deeply and obviously she is able to feel things. And of course Miu as an inventor has a deep (almost objectum like??) respect for machines that helps Kiibo accept that he can be a robot and a person at the same time, and is probably the only one in the class who understands just how impressive he really is.

Thanks thanks THANKS for reading if you seriously read all that!! Mwah!!!!

I would love to hear anyone's takes on my takes too :P I haven't been rotating them in my head for too long yet so I'm still developing my interpretations...

[nautilusopus]

okay FIIIIIINE i'll throw my hat into the Goncharov ring

Been a while i've done a proper movie breakdown, may as well be this one.

Rather surprisingly (but perhaps not too surprisingly given the unexpected renaissance of things like the original Dracula and Breaking Bad on this website out of seemingly nowhere and with very little prompting), I'm seeing a lot of new people suddenly interested in Martin Scorsese's seminal film classic Goncharov, originally released in 1973. Obviously a movie like that doesn't make it coming up on 50 years without generating a lot of discussion about the different ways the movie resonates and why, but coming into it in 2022 there's been so much cultural cruft that's collected around Goncharov that (similar to stories like Fight Club and Scarface) it's a little hard to parse what it's actually about with all the mythologising that's gone on around the characters.

Those movies, in one way or another, are about portraying the downfall of their protagonists -- Fight Club's after ironically creating another system of control and dehumanisation and becoming what he sought to destroy, Scarface's after being consumed by the wealth and power he's amassed. A lot of people assume it's that kind of story, because aren't most well-loved movies? However, I think this is ironically an assumption made because of the genre of film it is. All the people that aren't going, "OMG Goncharov is so cool and badass and fucks bitches," are going, "WOW I can't believe Goncharov is a cautionary tale about power corrupting," and in the process people miss that Goncharov is first and foremost about loss, in all its different forms.

I'm both kind of surprised and frustrated people miss this, given how utterly pervasive the movie is with its clock symbolism -- it's the one thing everyone remembers about it, it was in all the tie-ins. I dunno, maybe that got funneled back into the theory where they're meant to reinforce how Goncharov is just a mortal man at the end of the day, which is fine I guess, but the movie overall becomes a lot clearer when you interpret it through the lens of, "These things are gone and you can never get them back; clocks don't go backwards."

One of the most fascinating things about the movie is how every character embodies a different kind of loss. I'm gonna ease into this and start not with Goncharov but with:

Rybak, who is usually associated with loss as we typically think of it, i.e. the loss of loved ones via death. This comes up all the time, either in his trust issues (why he's being such a prick at the wedding), in the card game (he never bothers to bet much money, knowing he's bad at poker, and still loses all the same). Rybak is terrified of loss, cannot manage it, and ultimately is punished by losing what few people he had left and then being spared by Lorenzo who deems him punished enough, and is forced to survive, to grapple with what his life is now without them.

Goncharov's is actually more subtle, and it's loss of small, insignificant things as a result of the larger losses he believes he's processed. This is something that's frequently contrasted against Rybak. The pawn shop going under is actually a microcosm of this whole thing. Goncharov anticipates that this is obviously going to lead to financial issues for him, plans accordingly to deal with this, and... it works! He's saved! Except that means card games can't be hosted at his place anymore, given it's burned to the ground. Does this matter, in the grand scheme of his life? No, of course not. Poker night still gets had all the same. But it is different now, and always will be. Little things like this continue to add up, until something as insignificant as a towel -- a towel that never should have been in his room, but Sofia is no longer there to drop off his laundry and chat with him -- is ultimately the final nail in a coffin built of insignificant splinters, each one an imperceptible change underneath the much more larger, noticeable story beats of things like grief.

Otto is the big obvious one I'm not gonna linger on: loss of his youth, moments in the past that he wants to redo but can't. Most people at least seem to have gotten this one.

(This is also what the clocks get associated with a lot, which again, doesn't NOT make sense but also if it were just for this one character that, while thematically important, was honestly just a side character with limited screentime and only two scenes, would they really be all over the movie before Otto's name is even mentioned?)

Sofia's a bit abstract, and is the loss of self -- of the familiar anchors we have to who we are, what we think our core principles are, our place in society, who we want to be to our loved ones -- and by the time she dies she is rendered utterly unrecognisable to herself, and is horrified by it. She grieves herself the same way Rybak grieves his wife (even gets a direct visual callback via the way her face is lit when she's burning Lorenzo's check). You see echoes of this in Goncharov as well, but while Sofia is grieving the person she used to be, Goncharov is grieving the world around him (even though really, it's the same world it always was -- time keeps ticking on, one second per second, and neither one of them can ever un-fire that gun).

Lorenzo, tragically, gradually loses his freedom (and maybe in a parallel world would actually be the protagonist of a movie where he chokes on his own hubris like everyone seems to think Goncharov is GRUMBLE GRUMBLE). As he comes into his own more and more by his family's legacy, he is afforded fewer and fewer options about what decisions he can even make. Arguably he was doomed from the start, but the further he clings to power as a means to freedom, the more it drives him to destroying everything he ever (thought he) cared about. The tragedy of his character, and what makes him a good villain, is that he can clearly see what he is doing to himself and he absolutely hates it (his walking out early at the wedding is a tacit admission of this), but his absolute refusal to accept loss, to accept grief and pain and all the awful shit that comes with the human condition, is what causes him to toss aside every out he has because if he has enough CONTROL over his situation, surely he will never have to lose anything ever again. But, really, he already has.

I dunno. Goncharov is one of those movies that is great, and everyone seems to realise it's great, but nobody ever really puts into words why, and that's how you get Fight Club fans lmao. And it sucks because the actual discussion around the movie beyond "it's another hubris story but REALLY GOOD guys" is so much more fascinating and a much more earnest emotional truth that just never gets talked about.

[anonzentimes]

*guy who loves talking about despair disease voice* wait can we talk more about despair disease. i have so many thoughts on despair disease and esp how it pertains to nagito

i feel like when a lot of people first play/watch the games they see nagito as someone who lies to manipulate people, which while i can’t super blame them for thinking that way bc of how hajime tries to reconcile his conflicting feelings over nagito, i get SO frustrated when ppl call nagito a liar bc no!!! no he’s not!!! you’re falling for other characters’ perceptions of him!!! nagito almost never lies and when he does he’s either really bad at it (cough cough final FTE. “i got it all from a book” you are not slick buddy) or comes clean as soon as he’s achieved his desired outcome- it’s more bluffing than actual deception, and one thing he’s especially sincere in is his beliefs and admiration for the people around him. and the despair disease PROVES this without a doubt!!

ok. i know in-text the despair disease is described as “reversing people’s personalities,” but i’ve always interpreted it a little differently. ibuki isn’t the opposite of gullible, akane isn’t the opposite of a coward, and nagito isn’t the opposite of a liar. to me, it’s always seemed like the despair disease gives its host the trait they’d most hate to have— whatever trait would instill in them the deepest despair. ibuki hates conformity- stick her with a disease that makes her blindly follow whatever she’s told. akane hates showing weakness- force her into a state of constant crying. nagito hates the idea of deceiving his classmates- make him incapable of being sincere. this interpretation makes mikan’s disease make a little more sense too imo, since remembering her brainwashing isn’t exactly reversing her personality but instead literally filling her to the brim with despair. ANYWAYS.

nagito Actively Despises not being able to tell the truth. he hates the despair disease, he sees it as a complete waste. in the ult. luck and hope and despair mangas, we actually get to see some of his internal monologue right before he passes out, and he is In Hell. he’s pissed that he can’t serve as a proper stepping stone in his state, he thinks the whole disease is stupid, and he gets so frustrated about not being able to properly encourage the group that he Literally Starts Foaming At The Mouth ????? like if you EVER wanted undeniable proof that nagito is sincere look at the despair disease. it’s basically a roundabout truth serum for him and that’s a huge part of why it’s one of my favorite motives

sidenote i feel like the despair disease has a shit ton of analysis potential in general just bc of how it turns characters into what they hate the most!! i loveeee brainstorming what symptoms certain characters would have gotten were they to get infected. hajime especially. maybe he’d get a fawning disease where he starts praising everyone nagito-style (this would highlight their bystander parallels and also make hajime feel MISERABLE bc he fucking hates when nagito points out how similar they are lmao). or maybe he’d get an apathy disease that’d essentially izuru-fy him (wonderful foreshadowing potential there, not to imagine the incredible angst of izuru being the thing hajime would hate to be most in the world.) alas i am not a fanfic author so i will sit with my concepts but it is a wonderful daydream with any dangan characters i’d highly recommend it :]

YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEESSSS!!!!! I SCREAM IN UNISON WITH YOU I LOOOVEEE THE DESAIR DISEASE!!!!! MAN… I’M SO OBSESSED WITH HOW YOU INTERPRET AND ARTICULATED THE DESPAIR DISEASE💗💗💗 The Despair Disease is genuinely so good for analyzing I really do believe Danganronpa 2 Chapter 3 is the best Chapter 3 out of the franchise. I think the reserving of their personalities truly meaning the traits they would hate to have is soo good I’m eating up, sealing it in my heart, and using it forever such a delightful way to explain it. The interpretations on what disease Hajime would get is so fun, I’ve seen some people interpret him getting the honesty disease which is fun in concept but I don’t think it works as well as other ideas could, y’know? Your ideas for a potential apathy or fawning disease are really fun to me, I like the idea of the fawning disease tapping into how much of a realist he is and giving him the opposite attitude Lol. Thank you so much for sending this it’s so fun I’ll be thinking about this forever, I wish I was a fanfic writer aha! I really want to become a fanfic writer, soon with time I suppose. Thank you again for sharing your daydreams with me, you’re very right it does have a lot of analysis potential! :D

[maryfailstowrite]

Rose's quote in the crossword of the literature insane girl MV will never not fail to amaze me. I absolutely love it and here's why:

"Ego cogito ergo (turbatus) sum."

First with the basics: "Cogito, ergo sum", the original (not really, because the real original was in french, but whatever) quote by René Descartes, translates into "I think, therefore I am". I don't think the meaning needs much explaining, because it's just... that. It's one of the first principles of Descartes's philosophy, and it states that one's existence is certain because to think, beforehand you need to exist. You can't doubt your own existence because to doubt, you need to exist. It's as simple as that.

But this interpretation of the phrase has little to do with Rose's character. There's a word (or maybe two, but I'll get to that later) that the MV adds, and that changes the whole meaning of the phrase.

“Ego cogito ergo (turbatus) sum.”

Rose’s quote translates into “I think, therefore I am (troubled).” This is not her doubting her existence or whatever, this is about her memory. “Thinking” here isn’t meant as in literally just thinking, but as in Rose’s thought processing and reasoning. Her photographic memory makes her have an overload of information to process at all times, and after processing it, she’s unable to discard it no matter what. She’s troubled, troubled because no matter what, she can’t forget. Every murder, every drop of blood, every gasp, every word is engraved in her mind, and no matter how hard she tries, she’s doomed to remember it all for the rest of her life.

A lot of people see having a photographic memory as a blessing. Almost like a superpower. They think of detectives solving murder cases because they remembered the exact position of one of the curtains at the victim’s house, or in Rose’s case, they imagine her making perfect replicas of a painting just after seeing it once. And, sure, maybe she can do that. She is the Ultimate Art Forger, after all. But I still think her photographic memory is much more a curse than it is a blessing for her.

Humans aren’t made to remember. We are made to forget a very big part of our lives, in fact. Do you remember exactly every meal you’ve ever had? Every shower you’ve taken? Every outfit you’ve worn? No, of course not. You don’t. Just like you don’t remember every single time someone has given you a strange look, or every time you’ve done something embarrassing.

Do you see where I’m going with this? Forgetting is a coping mechanism. Not only does it prevent our brains from overloading with useless information, it also helps us heal from bad experiences. If we remembered every single detail from all of our bad past experiences we would go insane, we would never heal from those memories and emotions. We could replay the memory over and over and over again to analyze what could’ve been different, what we could’ve done in another way, and what we could’ve ultimately done to avoid the situation. But as humans, we forget. It takes time, but the details start to fade one by one, and by the end, the bad experience is just a foggy distant memory, a mix of lingering feelings and a blurry outline of what happened, an outline that can’t hurt us anymore…

Except for Rose. Rose remembers everything. This is why the world is so overwhelming for her (let alone the killing game). She dozes off half of the day because if she wasn’t sleeping, she’d have to remember everything that happened at that time. I think it’s easier to picture it if you put it like this: Imagine if you were forced to memorize every single thing that happened around you for a day. Not just what you do, but what everyone in your view and hearing range does. It sounds exhausting, right? Well, welcome to Rose’s mind.

Rose is troubled because she can’t forget. Or rather, she remembers, therefore she’s troubled (see the parallelism I did there with the quote we’re analyzing???? see it????). She’s condemned to remember every detail of everything that has ever happened to her, to replay moments like movies and analyze them until she finds out what could’ve been better, what could’ve been worse, what she could’ve done different. The problem is, the past is the past, and no matter how much you replay it, it never comes back. It’s just an illusion, a nightmare that appears in front of you, and yet you can never reach. You can just watch as it unfolds, unable to change it, unable to do anything, unable to look away. She can never look away.

As an ending to this post, I’d like to take a closer look at another detail. The original phrase is “Cogito, ergo sum”, as it’s already been stated before, but the version used in the MV is “Ego cogito ergo (turbatus) sum.” “Ego” simply means “I”, so it doesn’t add much meaning (in fact, the original French is “Je pense, donc je suis”, so the pronoun was already there from the beginning), but I still think adding it emphasizes the meaning they want to give to the phrase. It refers to Rose’s personal experience, so instead of making it a general quote anyone can say “I think, therefore I am (troubled)”, they emphasize the personal meaning of it by adding the “I”, which can be perfectly omitted in Latin without losing the phrase’s meaning. It’s something more like “I think, therefore I am (troubled)”, and I think it’s a great detail to see how different Rose’s experience of existing is compared to everyone else’s, or at least, how different she considers it to be.

In conclusion, I’m a nerd that loves looking too much into things. Thanks for coming to my TED talk 🫶🏻.

[the--artist]

Donna Beneviento and her Dance with Duality - An Analysis

9/10/24

Pretext: Donna Beneviento (ドナ・ベネヴィエント) is a character from Resident Evil 8 - a horror, first-shooting video game. She is one of the four lords that you/the protag Ethan Winters have to fight to collect four flasks which contain the body parts for Ethan to resurrect his daughter. This game also includes the wildly popular - Lady Demitrescu - the huge vampire gothic lady who entranced everyone on the sexuality spectrum everywhere.

While the four lords, themselves, are the evil antagonists of the story, they all have sympthetic (and unsympethetic) backstories and reasoining for doing what they do. They are all campy and stupid as well as menacing and frighting. For this anlysis I want to focus on one my favorite character from all time - Donna Beneviento - the quiet doll maker and the second lord we have to defeat.

Before I get started, thank you @celezztia for motivating me to write this! You are great mutual. Also thanks to @krisssssssy as well!

While it might not be as evident on the first watch/playthrough, Donna Beneviento walks this thin line with duality - a struggle and blessing for her. From her crest to her doll Angie, there are so many signs of an indecisive individual. Although her lack of screen time might make Beneviento seem boring or flat, there is a lot of pretext in her environment, personality, and choices that offer a lot to her character.

I wanted to write an analysis of this aspect of her and dive deep into what this could mean for Beneviento's character. Of course, there are plenty of different ways of interpreting her character since she is literally DROWNED in mystery, so feel free to criticize my analysis. I'd love to discuss it!!!

Angie Beneviento

...Okay, starting with the biggest showcase of this duality is Angie. Angie was a doll that Lady Beneviento got from her father and was very dear to her. She would play with it very often as she was lonely and cast out for having a scar on her face. Through the Gardner's Diary, we can see that Angie started to become more alive and alive after Donna was adopted.

Coming back to the present time, I think it's really interesting to question how Angie has SUCH a different personality from Donna. Is Angie Donna's split personality? Or is Angie just being 100% controlled by Donna - but just showcasing another aspect of Donna. The issue with this problem is that there is almost equal evidence for both sides of the argument.

During the final battle sequence, Donna is seen puppeteering Angie, and Angie then starts talking with Ethan. This could be used as proof that Angie needs Donna to function. Even during Ethan's trial, we see Donna with Angie. Donna has always been referred to as the puppeteer as well, which makes a lot of sense in this case. In scenes where we only interact with Angie, we can assume that Donna must be invisible and/or controlling Angie from a distance.

Proof that Angie is a separate person can reside in the fact that Angie is so much more loud, obnoxious, and berating than Donna. Donna struggles with talking as her voice is hoarse and dry - showcasing that she doesn't really speak - while Angie's voice is clear and loud. It also possible that the codou in Donna's brain allowed her to express a side of her that she felt she couldn't in the normal world, thereby creating Angie. It's also worth mentioning that Angie is never addressed as Donna in the game. Everyone mentions Donna and Angie separately.

The way the codou is unfortunately never really discussed, so it becomes very difficult to pinpoint how to treat Angie and Donna. But in both cases, they both showcase the duality of Benenviento. One quiet and calm (the Donna that everyone knows - including the gardener) and the loud Angie.

[Donna picking up Angie]

Thinking about why Angie's personality is the way it also interests me a lot. Since one can assume Donna had always been quiet and shy (basically showing no characteristics of Angie) before the codou, it is really interesting to me how a character like Donna ends up jelling with Angie. Is it because Angie is incredibly determined, attention-grabbing, and dominant? Did Donna need a way to interact with others while still keeping her comfort and distance? From the gardener's diary, it doesn't seem abnormal for a child (or even a teen) to speak to a doll when they are lonely. But I would assume a doll like Angie would have become less obnoxious if Donna was using Angie for comfort, no? When making friends in-person or online, don't we seek familiarity with others? So why did Donna feel the need to make her best friend so different?

I personally lean into the theory that Donna must have not gotten much affection, attention, and comfort during her childhood. The isolation coming from the death of her parents as well as having no friends must have forced Donna to seek out a way to express that. When the cadou was implanted in Donna's brain, this desire (separated now from Donna or not) led these desires to resurface and help deal with her current situation. If Donna needs attention from Mother Miranda, she doesn't have to speak at all, Angie can do it for her. Angie can grab attention for her. Angie can intimidate Ethan for her. Angie can accomplish all these things for Donna without her actually having to interact with them. I believe that when Donna was playing with Angie all those years ago, she must have expressed that loneliness to Angie - resulting in who Angie is today.

[Angie pushing Heisenburg and Demitrscu to fight, while a playful Donna watches her doll]

Beneviento's Design (feat Angie)

Alright!!! Now on to my favorite part of this analysis, Donna and Angie's design!

It's no secret that Donna is dressed up in mourning attire and Angie is dressed in a wedding dress. But the duality between both of their outfits is so insane! The fact that Donna is wearing all black and is pale as the moon, while Angie has grey skin but wears all white? Both of their outfits look worn and old as well. They both share a marking on the right side of their face which has the codou implantation (Donna) and moon crescent (Angie). Donna is very beautiful but hides her face with a veil while Angie is less beautiful (please don't go after me!) but shows her face loud and clear. Donna is so afraid to be seen but is ironically being seen through Angie when you consider all the design elements they have in common.

One can assume Donna wears a mourning veil to showcase her constant mourning for Claudia Beneviento (...I might make another post on this idk yet on who I believe she could be) and her parents. There is so much death that this girl has experienced that it has put her in a constant state of mourning. There isn't any reason to feel happy for Donna. Claudia's grave is beautifully decorated that Donna cannot move on. We are never given the reason for the death of her parents, but by the fact that Lord Benenviento created a doll for his daughter, we can only assume that they were a very close and tight-knit family. It is very unfortunate that a child had to go through this much tragedy with only having her Gardner there as a comfort.

Angie is such a contrast to this. Angie is like a child. Angie represents birth and life. She is bright cheerful and lively. Despite being a nonliving doll, she has more "life" than Donna. Through all this death and tragedy Donna experienced, she can finally breathe the normality of life through Angie.

[Please watch the RE8 puppet show, it is honestly so adorable!]

I wonder why Donna thought it was fitting to put Angie in a wedding dress? Did Donna dream of a wedding of her own? Was Claudia really Benviento's daughter? Why did Donna choose to celebrate life through Angie? I guess we might never know.

As mentioned previously, one commonality between Donna and Angie is their scar. It is just a hint of showing how divided they both are. The way they reflect each other here is adorable lol.

The Crest

The sun and the moon as well as life/death are both extremely important themes to Donna Benevineto (shout out to Dua Lipa's Houdini who I associate Donna with). Both Angie and Donna are divided but complete together. In some ways it feels like Donna just be herself if not a "full character" she needs Angie to complete her. It is not just Donna, but Donna AND Angie. No matter how divided Benviento(s) is/are, they will always need the other part to be whole.

In a way, the Benviento crest cemented this way of thinking by showcasing the crest together. Angie as the Sun, and Donna as the Moon - together make up a whole. I always ponder if the other Benevientos also dealt with this duality, but that might be questions left for interpretation....

Thank you so much for reading this far if you did! I've been meaning to write on this topic since forever! Even though this analysis was decently long, there is still SO MUCH to dig into Donna. So many theories on who she really is and what happened to her. I will continue to write about her in the future.

[molsno]

I have such complex feelings about danganronpa but the treatment of chihiro fujisaki still remains a major sticking point to me.

I've had several different interpretations of the character over the years as my relationship with my gender has evolved but after all these years I feel like I can finally mourn the way she was treated as a trans girl.

it's just... heinous. kazutaka kodaka is so transmisogynistic in his writing that it's sickening to even think about. how am I supposed to feel about the fact that his work has touched my life in such a major way? I'm still talking about danganronpa over 10 years after I first got into it. but an unskippable, major, and early part of the story of the first game makes it clear how he thinks about people like me.

the text of the game is vile. along with the other students, she's threatened with her deepest secret being revealed if nobody murders one of their classmates. she has to face the fact that she's going to be forcibly outed to her classmates in the worst way possible. after she's killed out of jealousy for her bravery by mondo owada, who at the very least has the decency to move her body from the boys' locker room to the girls' to protect her secret, her body is groped to "confirm" that she's a "boy", she's immediately misgendered by all her classmates, and monokuma tells everyone her backstory in a way that totally disregards her actual feelings.

chihiro is not a boy. she doesn't ever claim to be one, except in school mode, which crucially, is explicitly not canon and wasn't even present in the original release. the only reason why anyone, in-game and in the fandom, believes that she's a boy is because of transmisogyny and because of monokuma's explanation. is he the type of character that you should trust, though? not only is he willing to forcibly out a trans girl, this is a pattern of behavior; the mastermind controlling monokuma later threatens to out juzo sakakura as gay as blackmail in the dr3 anime.

when I view the actions of chihiro fujisaki, I can't see anything but a trans girl. she has a severe inferiority complex, cries easily, lacks confidence in herself, hesitates to spend time with cis girls due to a fear of being ostracized for who she is, and heavily latches onto anyone who treats her respectfully (as seen if you do her free time events). and then she's thrust into a horrible situation where she could be killed at any moment, and then given 24 hours to try and come out on her own terms before monokuma does it for her in a way that explicitly misgenders her. she wants to become someone strong, someone who can stand up for herself and fight back against bullies like monokuma who don't respect her gender, but she doesn't get to do that on her own time. she still tries, though, and for it, she's killed.

it's just... tragic. what else can I say? she's yet another example of transmisogynistic tropes in media, but she feels personal to me in a way that few other such characters do. I've always loved chihiro a lot, even when I was younger and couldn't quite put my finger on why.

I don't think I would terribly mind her death if kodaka was a better writer. if danganronpa actually made use of all of its seemingly largely unintentional anticapitalist potential, if it touched on systemic issues such as transmisogyny with tact and respect (for example, if the other students respected her identity and opposed monokuma for repeatedly misgendering her), her death would still be upsetting, but I could accept that.

she just... deserves so much better.

[goldrushenthusiast]

“Nico didn’t need to be gay!!” “Everyone is making everyone queer!”

SHUT UP!

Do you want to know my thought process, leading up to HOH?

“oh my god is he serious there’s no way he’s gonna actually make him have a crush on Annabeth yeah just we need more of that terrible trope (c’mon please be Percy) are you seriously kidding me (wait omfg it might be) wait holy shi-”

Until the actual part I thought it was going to be Annabeth. I could not believe it. And yeah, it was fucking traumatic but do you know how many times I reread that passage because I thought it would go away? Be forgotten about forever? Never talked about again? But it WASNT. And I was incredulous.

Name one gay character from Harry Potter (no, dumbledore doesn’t count. literally stfu).

Name one gay character from divergent (Lynn dying and saying she loved Marlene doesn’t count). Edit: apparently there is also one gay couple and a guy having a crush on four, I had in fact forgotten about those (I haven’t read the books in 4+ years (2 of which I didn’t know I was gay) and I have always been impartial to lesbians ig)

Name one gay character from Hunger Games (no, Plurbius’ partner (Cyprus) and Barb Azure & the gal down the street don’t count).

Now you might be thinking “ha! you can’t say they don’t count!” but I CAN (especially dumbledore).

there’s a reason I remember the exact characters and the exact times their partners were mentioned! there’s a reason those are the only ones! Plurbius’ partner Cyprus is mentioned ONCE! and no pronouns used. Lynn and Marlene may have had chemistry before (I haven’t read the books in a while) but the only time she “came out” was her DEATH? and it could be interpreted differently. The Covey, Coriolanus, and Sejanus leaving to lake and letting Barb Azure see the gal up the street. That’s it! In the most popular Y/A books we get fed TABLE SCRAPS.

In PJO, it’s different. So much different. We have Nico, Will, Piper, Alex, Magnus (technically? idk), and probably more.

PJO also wasn’t marketed as some huge inclusive book! It was just a normal book, with a normal gay character in it. With 3! With 4! With 5!

No, not everybody in books needs to be gay. But some people in real life are, and sometimes those people have a hard time accepting that and sometimes seeing themselves represented helps just a tiny bit. So stfu and let us have this because y’all have EVERYONE else.

[funnycreatortimetravel]

Small rant about Sans' character that no one is ever going to read and is probably kind of inaccurate, but I'm going to scream into the void nonetheless because why the hell not and I'm kind of bored.

I feel like the concept of Sans as a whole has been so utterly gutted by the fandom and not in the way you'd think. Not because of the AUs which are all so oddly Sans-focused (but at least we have Underverse which is actually pretty good) but in the sense of the people who claim to "actually understand Sans canonically" and "try to stay as canon as possible" while also equally missing the point sort of. Hence, why we have this long and overplayed image I'm sure everyone has seen a billion times:

If I could lay some groundwork down, Undertale came out in 2015, nearly a decade ago. The internet was a different time and place then and fandom creativity reached new peaks that no one had ever seen before, and as a result, a lot of Undertale was exaggerated, changed, cut up, and then put back together. Why? Because in all honesty, Undertale was a really simple game with a simple premise. Sure there were bits and pieces scattered throughout, parts like who Gaster was, who Chara was when they were alive, who Sans is in general; all the typical fandom theory shenanigans we've come to expect in the recent years. And in that excitement, Sans became the staple of Undertale pretty much, or at least everything it represented. This macabre, yet adorably misleading game with funny moments and interesting think pieces that people are still speculating about. That's pretty much the basis of Sans. So I get why Sans became the quintessential poster child for such a subversively ambitious game. I get why, then, people try to showcase Sans as this badass God character who knows and remembers all of resets and cries over Papyrus and is just an edge lord in general. It doesn't mean it's accurate in the slightest, but I get the idea of it nonetheless. In the absence of content, and there's a lot of it in Undertale, (I mean, it took me 4 hours to 100% it in the Pacifist and Neutral Routes, and 5 hours to beat Genocide, including the times it took me to beat Undyne because she thoroughly kicked my ass and Sans as well) the fans filled those gaps with what they saw fit and what they saw fit was so wide and diverse that the gap overflowed and the game pretty much became unrecognizable.

And I (except for the truly questionable and gross stuff, you know what I'm talking about) love the fandom for that, I truly do. Just the sheer number of comics, spin-off games, AUs, art, and fanfiction that answered every question I had and more was and is impressive, but even so, there's only so much that can be done with the context Undertale provides us before the content gets...stale. Hence my point on why Sans' character was so exaggerated is because Undertale as a whole had been exaggerated and oversaturated and overplayed and generally...not what the game or Sans was originally. But that was peak 2016-2019, though, a few years ago. And the interpretations and eras, like everything, have changed.

Now back to my actual point. It's now 2024. The fandom has noticeably slowed down. All of the AUs and theories and fanfictions that were popular have either been forgotten about over the years, randomly rediscovered or still ongoing, or just abandoned entirely. The game has been pretty much combed through until every file has been cracked, every document leaked, and every secret discovered. It's like a picked over turkey at this point and a lot of the old creators have indeed left behind the game in pursuit of newer things, which is understandable. It's not the center of attention it once was and in that wake, we don't really have a lot of the same pillars in the Undertale community that we used to. And in this transformed community, we have the left over children, now young adults and teenagers, to pick up the pieces. And in that, Sans' character, as well as Undertale itself, has again, been reformed.

That was a lot of words. But I hope I at least set the center stage. My issue, pretty much, is that the leftover fans deem themselves as "above the cringe" the old fandom left behind, which, is fair enough. And in doing so, a lot of the foundation of the 2016-2019 Undertale fandom was kind of overwritten. No, now Sans is no longer this edgy, overpowered God figure ready to right the wrongs of the player, no, now he's this apathetic guy who doesn't care about anyone, including himself, and is only powerful because he cheated. And to be fair, I see some merit in this interpretation. Sans is in fact, a pretty morally ambiguous guy. He doesn't even attempt to stop the player during the genocide route until there's nothing left. He threatens the player on the pacifist route even when we pose no threat. He makes so many allusions about himself not caring about anything. So I get it. Everyone is tired of everything Sans-related. I was too at one point. But in trying to counteract this fanon interpretation of Sans, I feel like this new one is also semi-inaccurate. This new interpretation of Sans is meant to be seen as "mature" and "not cringe" when in fact, Undertale is and always will be sort of cringe. And that's OK! That's why I and others love the game so much, because it's not afraid of being anything other than what it is and what it claimed to be. It had a story in mind that it wanted to tell and it did so unabashedly. The need to separate Undertale and Sans itself from the cringe is so pointless and almost a little juvenile. And imo, even ruins the character of Sans himself.

Sans does care about Papyrus, so so so much. He reads him bedtime stories. He plays along with his illusions of grandeur. He calls out the player when he's killed, despite Sans having to remain objective as a judge. I feel like Sans not intervening in Papyrus' death isn't because he doesn't care, it's because his entire job is to act as a judge and in a position where he's mostly neutral. He knows the player has powers to redo and undo things, so thus, he gives us room to make those choices, for better or worse. He's like, the anti-toriel. He refuses to hold your hand. He tells YOU to make the right choice, and by you, I mean the player. And in that sense, I feel like that's not something a completely apathetic guy would do. Someone like that wouldn't even see the point of choices, of having an option. Someone like that wouldn't care about getting out of bed in the morning, getting several jobs, or telling a person with higher power to just engage with your brother.

Like come on, don't say he doesn't put effort into anything, like he went out of his way to make sure Pap's Holiday party went perfect. He's constantly going above and beyond for his brother.

Sans has emotions and they're so complex and so well-written, but I feel like this counter-cringe culture of the fandom wants him to be this guy who's either too depressed or too lazy to engage with others, or someone who would simply shrug off the death of loved ones when we have proof that Sans does indeed try hard for Papyrus in the ending where everyone dies but his brother. It's an "oh shit" sort of moment when he realizes that Papyrus is the only person he has left and thus, he puts in the effort to be better for him. It's not that he doesn't care or see the point, he's just kind of numb at this point. If Papyrus dies in the neutral routes, you don't see Sans again until the judgment hall and he'll call you a dirty brother killer and tell you to go to hell. That's something someone who at least cares a little would do. He's not above insulting the player and he's not above getting pissed. I've never really seen him as a, "well that's that then," character when it comes to Papyrus dying, for me, it's always been, "I'm angry, but I can maintain my composure and still do what I have to do."

Even in the genocide routes, Sans wants to give up and do nothing. He wants to let himself die without much thought. But he knows that he has to stand between you and oblivion. It's another, "Oh shit" moment, but in the opposite way. He knows he's gonna die. But he still has hope. Not necessarily that you'll be a good person, but that you can try another way and make better choices. He embodies the same mentality Papyrus did at the beginning of the run, believing there's a better chance for another future where everyone can be happy.

Sans isn't a nihilist, not all the way. There's still a chance, still a part of him that has hope for everything, regardless of the route. And should the Pacifist route be completed, you'll see that he's genuinely happy. He DOES care, or at least he's beginning to know that caring about things is ok and healthy even.

Ex 1: If you go to Sans' lab after completing a True Pacifist Route, you get this bit of dialog:

Ex 2: Sans and Papyrus talking about a Christmas party they had on the Newsletter of the 5th Anniversary of Undertale.

The strongest, yet most complex example of this that we see is that he upholds his promise with Toriel and will continue to do so until the genocide route at the very end because he wants to at least give us, the player, a chance. And even if it was a cop-out for being lazy, I believe that Sans legitimately believes there's a chance for us to turn around and be a better person, or at the very least, make better choices. We know that Sans is a person who doesn't like making promises at all, and even though he said that his threatening to kill Frisk is a joke, had he not made that promise to Toriel, I can't 100% say that he still wouldn't intervened in the genocide and neutral routes.

And if you think about it, Sans upholding that promise just makes me question him even more. Like, even if you kill his brother, so long as you don't kill everyone, he won't kill you just because of that. He sticks to his promise and his morals so much, even if it costs him everything because well, what type of judge would he be if he didn't stick to his moral code?

"If you have some special power, don't you think it's your responsibility to do the right thing?"

And by that logic, if he made a promise with someone, don't you think he'd feel he'd have the responsibility to uphold it?

We also know that he makes an effort to give us updates on the Underground after we leave in the neutral routes because he still wants us to know, at least, the consequences of our actions, so it's not like he's just lazily letting us get away with anything with do (even if he does physically.) He still holds our actions above our heads. He still keeps his promise. He still knows that we can make a better outcome. And if that doesn't say anything about him, I don't know what does.

Even in the neutral route endings where things are objectively going terribly for the monsters with Frisk killing Asgore and taking the souls to leave the barrier, Sans still never gives up. Sans, of all people.

And sure, Sans isn't a saint, not by a long shot, but he does have some moral weight in the long run, and by playing the part of a judge, he has a certain level of disattachment that's necessary when it comes to doing his job. Nowadays, I don't see the "fanon" sans that everyone loves to rag on, the one that's overly emotional and jarringly out of character, more so, I see everyone ragging on that interpretation, and then coming up with an equally inaccurate interpretation of Sans just not giving a shit and letting Frisk get away with everything just because he's "not emotional and only wants to be lazy, blah, blah, blah, nihilism, existentialism, it's more canonically accurate, unlike that CRINGE FANON SANS!" /or being a total unserious prankster with no other personality traits, and that's equally as jarring for me.

So in conclusion, I feel like "Fanon" Sans, the one where he's breaking down and sobbing over Papyrus and holding his scarf is just as inaccurate as the "more canon one" where he's apathetic and simply just not caring about his death, or at the very best, says "it is what it is." Sans is a character whose emotions aren't apparent, but he still does care in his weird philosophical way. He loves Papyrus and genuinely thinks he's cool. He's a jokester character who loves a good laugh and being laid back. He doesn't like putting in effort, but he will if he has to. He wants the player to make good choices, so he generally tries to stay out of the way to give us that freedom. Not because he knows we're gonna kill Papyrus, but because he knows we have greater power and wants us to use it to do the morally right thing. He isn't above doing morally grey things either, like threatening to kill Frisk in case they pose a threat to monster kind, but I believe even then, his hesitation to just accept a human in the underground is somewhat understandable given the oppressive tension between humans and monsters. Additionally, he does put in effort when it comes to caring about monsters other than Papyrus, Toriel, and even Alphys and Asgore, he cares about them all: (it's implied that he feeds the amalgamates in Alphy's old lab as proven by the same dog food we see in the lab being in Sans' house and Alphys even calls him a good guy because he helps her in the aborted genocide route ending, him telling jokes to Toriel and genuinely trying to bring some joy in her life even though she's a stranger and doesn't have an obligation to, even staying with her in the Ruins after she's dethroned in the Queen Undyne ending, him acting as the judge before Asgore and even being in such an important position requires you to have a solid sense of morality and conviction, his respect for Undyne as a warrior/leader depending on the ending and in the Undertale Newsletter, he makes an effort to score a goal for his team in Hocky, and Undyne of all people seems proud of him, and pretty much everything that has to do with Papyrus he's at the very least involved or interested in.)

My words don't have a lot of merit. I'm simply saying how I interpret things. But as a big sister, I see Sans as a good big brother who's not too involved, but also deeply cares about his younger brother and his friends. I get that stoicism and being "logical" and "cold" is the new trend and whatnot with all these edits of badass characters and longing for a time when everything was less...emotional, but in doing that, it shuts a lot of discussion about Sans as a person and his complex emotions as a whole. I feel like it's too difficult and kind of silly to chalk him up as either one or the other. I feel like there's a nice middle ground between the "cringe" fanon sans and the "cool, apathetic" canon sans that a lot of fans either go one or the other on. Anyway, that's about it for my rant. It's kind of nonsensical and a little hard to follow, but I hope I was able to get my thoughts across nonetheless.

I guess it was a big rant after all. Oh well. It is what it is.