#i mean those three examples above are not the only examples but the most clear and recent ones i suppose

[endless-ineffabilities]

some mildly spicy Ewan 'The Iceberg' Mitchell headcanons for your imaginative indulgence

I want 'em all to see you look good on top of me At this time at night, I need not one, not three Just your two hands on me like my life needs savin' Let 'em all know

a/n: inspired by the release of the song 2 hands. purely self-indulgent, purely fictional, and nothing more. no explicit bits, because I steer clear of those for rpfs. so on your marks, get set...

main masterlist

✨️ He would be the most gentle partner during your first time together. Not rushing in the slightest as he prepares you, making sure you feel good and comfortable every step of the way, going down on you like it's his last meal on earth. He'd want to maintain eye contact, even as you fall apart underneath him. He would clean you up afterwards, and whisper sweet nothings in your ear as you fall asleep in his arms.

✨️ He is, of course, sweet and attentive and tender in bed. But the more you get to know him, the more he reveals his rougher, dominant side. You would find out that they were all right about him—while he does keep to himself a lot, Ewan is indeed secretly naughty >:)

✨️ There will be moments when he would be unsure, his eyes would flit all over the room then back to you, and you would know that he's biting back a question.

✨️ What is it, baby? — Hmm, nothing. — C'mon, Ewan. — I was wondering if... if I can take... pictures of you? — Of course, I mean... you already take a lot of pictures of me. — No, I mean... pictures. — Okay. Pictures. What...? — (he'd bury his face in your neck, as if ashamed) I want one where I can see my baby. Every single bit of my baby. — Oh.

✨️ And so that'll be the start of Ewan's most prized album in his phone. Suddenly, the lad will have a knack for photography. He'd capture all the right angles.

✨️ The boy is needy as hell. He'd actually whine in protest when he wants to do it, when he craves you, and you'd brush him off because you're busy working or you're in a rush to go to a meeting.

✨️ Baby, c'mon, just stay. — Ewan, I have to go to work. — I'm a successful actor, I can provide for you, baby. You don't ever have to work again. — Ewan, you're so ridiculous. — Okay, fine, fiiiiiine. But... just give me 10 minutes please. — I really gotta go, babe. — Alright, 5 minutes. Promise to make you scream.

✨️ He's a sucker for neck kisses. It tickles him a little when you nibble on the underside of his jaw, the crook of his neck. He could just lie there forever with his head tilted back and his fingers threaded in your hair.

✨️ But as much as he likes receving neck kisses, he likes doling them out even more. Hickeys stir a primal instinct in him, he likes seeing you covered—branded—in them. As if they prove that you're his and only his.

✨️ His favourite sight is watching you in the throes of climax. His second favourite is when you look up at him as you're on your knees, holding his gaze as you bring him closer to the edge.

✨️ Your bits and bobs would not be in places where you left them. The childhood photo of yours that you tacked onto the board above your desk — in Ewan's wallet. Your favourite piece of lace underwear — for some reason, in the hidden inner pocket of his trusty travel backpack. Your old hairtie — snug around his wrist, because he'd want to keep something of yours on him at all times (and! also useful in case you'd be in a new city together, for example, and you need 10 minutes and your hair neatly kept away from your face).

✨️ Ewan (the true blue cinephile) likes a cheeky fumble in the screen-lit darkness of the cinema. This means that you know to wear a skirt during your movie dates, to give him easy access as his hand wanders under your folded-up coat on your lap. He'd keep his head forward, watching the film as he buries his digits, but his darkened eyes give him away.

✨️ As much as he loves seeing you in nothing but your underwear and one of his metal t-shirts, wearing his clothes for long would be a challenge — the moment he catches sight of you like that, he's instantly turned on. That Metallica shirt would meet the floor. But... there would be times when he would want to have you with nothing but that on.

✨️ He wouldn't mind if you accidentally call him Aemond in the middle of it. It even spurs him on. He would also beg you to please call him my Prince or Prince Regent.

✨️ You would help him practice his lines. One thing in particular—he would want to fully act out the steamy scenes between Aemond and Alys with you, so he could carry that memory of you in his performance.

✨️ He would drive you both around in the old Ford he got from his dad as a gift for his 22nd. You like that he still uses the same car, even as his success continues to grow. And you would become quite familiar with every inch of that newly upholstered backseat.

✨️ If you ask him, he'll tell you he's keeping that car until it's nothing but rust on wheels. Every faint stain and tiny scratch on the leather a reminder of heated moments (fogged up windows, tangled limbs, sharp commands, gear shifts, riding) too precious to part with.

✨️ Not to mention, that backseat is his favourite location to do it in. And it's yours too ;)

[rainbow-scarab]

Hallownest Symbols, the Ancient Civilization, and the Pale King

Sooo. Since I made my post on Hallownest symbols I've had some new insights.

The Hallownest symbol, with its lined oval and three sets of wings, predates the kingdom as it was under the Pale King and White Lady. It can be found on arcane eggs.

Lemm, on arcane eggs: This civilisation may claim itself the first, but something else did exist within this place before Hallownest. Each egg offers a narrow glimpse into that forgotten age.

It's not just the arcane eggs though. The symbol can also be found in the Abyss, on the lighthouse. Sorta.

You see, the lighthouse isn't just one structure--it's two. It's an older, crumbling structure....and then the new shiny construction that the Pale King added on top.

And looking at the older structure, the platforms themselves have the Hallownest symbol on it. Oval with wings.

Another detail I've noticed in the Abyss is that this structure isn't the only one. It can be seen in the background around the void sea:

Just, further cementing the thought that the old crumbling building beneath the shiny new top is not a construction under the Pale King, but instead something quite ancient. Just one of many buildings, a conveniently tall structure for the Pale King to repurpose into a lighthouse.

So what does this mean?

Various sources in the game point to the Pale King having portrayed himself as the creator of Hallownest. Lemm, in his quote above. And some more examples:

Lore tablet in King's Pass: Higher beings, these words are for you alone. Beyond this point you enter the land of King and Creator. Step across this threshold and obey our laws. Bear witness to the last and only civilisation, the eternal Kingdom. Hallownest

Hunter's Journal, on wingmoulds: The bugs of Hallownest believed that their King created this world and everything in it. For what purpose, I wonder? Were his subjects companions, or toys, or children? Such a mind seems unknowable.

The developer notes in the game also indicate that the Pale King wanted to get rid of other gods:

The moth tribe were (perhaps) descended from Radiance. However, the King convinced them somehow to seal Radiance away. I guess so he could rule Hallownest with his singular vision, as a monarch/god with no other gods.

The dev notes are not canon and it's clear that they were never intended to be seen by others. But I think there's something to be said at least for him attempting a "singular vision". Uniting Hallownest under one rule, portraying himself as creator, creating a certain order. Some more quotes:

Bardoon: For quiet retreat did I climb up here, away from spitting creatures. Ormmph... Yes. High up. Away from simple minds, lost to light. Theirs is a different kind of unity. Rejection of the Wyrm's attempt at order.

Mask Maker, reacting to Ghost having King's Brand: No bug has ever laid claim to this whole. Even the beasts knew their limits and bound their realm at Nest's edge. It is the ancient caste that made attempt at such vast rule. Hallownest's ruin reflects well those fared attempts.

I believe Mask Maker is referring to the Ancient Civilization having attempted to rule over all of Hallownest. There's a possibility they're referring to Hallownest under the Pale King, as "ancient" does not necessarily mean what fans call the Ancient Civilization (and indeed most instances of the word "ancient" refer to Hallownest under the Pale King). But "attempts" being in the plural, I think Mask Maker intends to draw a parallel here between the two civilizations.

Speaking of King's Brand...

I believe now this is the best symbol of the Pale King we have. His original symbol.

As I noted in my first post on Hallownest symbols, the Hallownest seal seems the most associated with the Pale King when it has the crown on it. And the few actual depictions of him, in statues, idols, and shrines, all have his crown, but lack wings. Save for the glowing silhouette of him in Ogrim's dream battle, there are no depictions of him with wings. He may lack wings entirely, or have some form of artificial wings.

In fact, I find it quite interesting how you can pick up monarch wings as an item.

They are described by the game as being made of "ethereal matter". The game manual calls them "wings of a monarchfly". It's possible that the Pale King had such wings as seen here, not part of his original body, but made somehow.

And, just to look at the symbols again...

If one were to superimpose the old Hallownest Seal from the time of the Ancient Civilization on top of the King's Brand, you'd get the current Hallownest Seal. Oval Bug body, wings, crown, and tail.

So, what I'm thinking, the impression that I'm getting....

The Pale King came to Hallownest. He saw all the evidence of the Ancient Civilization, which had already fallen. He took on bug form (which may have happened before or after he saw the symbol and other evidence of the ancient civ, but I have to wonder if witnessing Hallownest's history and symbols influenced even this decision to become small). He, for reasons beyond the purpose of this post, decided he wanted to rule Hallownest as king and "creator" (which again may or may not have been part of his decision to be reborn).

He established his kingdom. He took on aspects of preexisting Hallownest, essentially claiming the legacy of the Ancient Civilization as his own. He took on bug form, and gave himself wings, to match this old image, as if it was always about him.

He established his palace in the Ancient Basin. He had access to the Abyss, mostly closed off from the rest of the populace. He studied the void. But the bugs of the Ancient Civilization had a different attitude about void, as indicated by Lemm in the Hunter's Journal entry on the void idol:

Inspired or mad, those ancient bugs. They devoted their worship to no lord, or power, or strength, but to the very darkness itself.

The Pale King instead was worshipped as a god by his people. He instead treated the void as something to control. He studied it. He tested it. He created void constructs to guard his palace. He used it, to stake the future of his entire kingdom on.

I could go on and on about this. And I intend to. But this is as far as I will go in this post, meant to be an update to my last post on symbols. But, I already have a long post I put together months ago, didn't post, and just have to update with new thoughts. So hopefully, I'll be expanding on all the implications here for Hallownest history soon enough.

[pascaloverx]

NO LIGHT

SUMMARY: Your life is simple. You are a pastry chef who has just opened a bakery near your home. A new life, being a new person. But when James Barnes shows up at your bakery injured, asking you to offer him shelter, your life takes a sudden turn.

AUTHOR'S NOTE: The characters in this fanfiction are not my creation and all belong to the Marvel universe. This story will feature scenes of violence, brief intense intimate moments, and inappropriate language. To the readers, I wish you a good read and ask that you engage with the fanfiction if you like it. Do not interact with this fanfiction if you are underage. Enjoy reading.

TWO FOUR

THREE

You're sitting on the floor of your living room, waiting for Barnes to finish scanning your apartment for any signs that someone might be watching you. The most ironic part of this is that he's doing it just minutes after discreetly placing a camera above your door. The message this sends to you is that only he can watch your every move.

"What can you tell me about your life?" you ask while serving a glass of wine to each of you. You're certainly nervous about drinking wine near the expensive rug you received as a gift from a bakery customer, but it seems worth the risk when you think that drinking wine while sitting on the floor seems romantic.

"Well… non-confidential details. For example, my middle name, which is Buchanan, by the way. I was born on March 10th, a beautiful spring day. My mother used to say I was the most patient baby she ever knew. On the other hand, during my teenage years, I became a troublemaker. And I only started to behave better when I met my best friend. Steve was definitely the best person in the universe. Always thoughtful, trying to be cheerful even when there was no reason to be. The rare times he lost his temper, I knew the other person was in the wrong." Barnes sits down next to you. He smiles sweetly, as if he's fondly remembering the past. Then he takes a sip of the wine and looks at you, as if he's expecting something. You don't realize that you've been staring at him or making the atmosphere a bit awkward until he clears his throat, as if prompting you to say something.

"Your best friend must have had to put up with a lot to keep you in line… considering you're still getting into trouble even today. By the way, do you guys still keep in touch?" you ask, as if returning to reality after losing your train of thought while staring at Barnes. But how can you avoid getting lost in the most beautiful blue eyes you've ever seen?

"He wouldn't be proud of what I've become. But we lost contact after, let's say, we went our separate ways. In my mind, he's living a peaceful life, maybe with a house near some lake where he can fish. Maybe he's married, with at least one dog. But part of my job was saying goodbye to what was valuable to me before, well... before I accepted the job. A sacrifice I was willing to make." Barnes says, this time between sips of wine, seeming to get emotional. It's probably the wine taking effect, or maybe it's the longing for those he had to leave behind.

"And do you regret it? Giving up being with those you loved most for a job that obviously puts your life at risk? I don't mean to criticize you, but it's not too late to have regrets. We could have died when that guy attacked the bakery." You end up judging Barnes' life a bit, without intending to, but you know you've crossed a line when he looks at you with a certain anger, saying nothing.

"I didn't realize I was here to be judged. What else do you want to criticize about my life? The first time I fell in love with someone? Or maybe something more spicy, like like the time I fucked my partner while we were on a plane? Do you want to know if I managed to make her cum or would you like to criticize me because sex in a public place is wrong?" He takes another sip of wine, emptying his glass. You feel a mix of emotions as you listen to him speak. He wanted to humiliate you, that's obvious. So you don't think twice before throw the rest of the wine in your glass in his face.

"I would have apologized for intruding on your life in an untimely manner. But you can't talk to me like that. Now, I'd like you to get out of my apartment." You say angrily, getting up off the floor and hoping your expensive carpet stayed intact after you throw your wine at Barnes. You assume he can leave on his own, so you head to your bathroom to wash your hand. It's stained with wine, so you clean it off. Your thoughts are in turmoil, wondering how something that was supposed to be romantic lost its meaning. Maybe Barnes was better in theory than in practice; maybe your hypothetical Barnes was just an illusion. You only refocus when you catch a glimpse of Barnes standing near the bathroom door out of the corner of your eye.

"I overreacted. You didn't mean to be disrespectful, and I was out of line. It wasn’t my finest moment." Barnes says as he approaches you, and you watch him through the reflection in the mirror. He quickly moves to stand behind you, not close enough to touch, but close enough for you to feel the warmth of his breath against your back. You get goosebumps, unsure if it’s because of his proximity or the huskiness in his voice as he speaks.

"I should have guessed it would be like this. You clearly have no intention of letting me get close to you. And you know what? Right now, it seems to me that you're doing just fine on your own." you say cynically, which seems like the right thing to do at the moment. Barnes gives a crooked smile and then moves closer. You turn to face him, as if you don’t want to make this moment more dramatic than it needs to be.

"Want to know something about me? I push away most of the good people I know because, most of the time, I have no idea if I deserve to have them around. But somehow, I don't push you away as easily. I eat your bread every day even though I don't like bread that much, just because I noticed you like to test new recipes when I stop by your bakery. Your coffee isn’t your strong suit, but I drink it almost religiously. Not everything I know about you comes from the fact that I put you at risk. I just took an interest in the lovely baker who smiles at me every morning as if I were the most important person in the world." Barnes says, looking into your eyes, and you’re surprised. All this time, you thought you were the only one noticing him. But he was noticing you too.

You have no immediate reaction, processing what he just said. Then, a surge of confidence takes over you; you place your hand gently on Barnes' face and caress him. But something awakens in Barnes. He places his hands on your waist, pulling you closer, and in moments, he brings his lips to yours. The initial contact is delicate as he explores every part of your mouth. It takes you a moment to believe that you're kissing James Barnes, but once you realize it, you pull his neck closer, deepening the kiss. It's as if your mouth is waging a war with his, as you both savor the taste of each other. You let out a soft moan as he presses you against the sink, but you quickly wrap your legs around his waist. He runs his hands down your back until he reaches your ass and holds it tightly. Urging you to climb onto your sink, you feel his hands release you onto the sink and then touch your thighs and leg. You are however interrupted by the ringing of his cell phone. Apparently she was worried about the lack of news. He takes a breath while you watch him text Natasha, probably reassuring her. Then he looks at you, but this time with a hint of regret. It’s obvious it was too good to be true.

"Let me guess? You need to leave, and it’s better if we don’t talk about what just happened because you shouldn’t have done that?" you say as if you already know what he’s going to say, which you probably do, because he doesn’t make any move to deny it.

"It seems that, in the end, you know more about me than you realize," Barnes says awkwardly before quickly leaving your apartment, leaving only a lingering tension in the air. Soon after, you decide to take a shower and go to bed. Tomorrow is a new day, and thinking about Barnes won’t do any good right now. The next day, you head to work earlier than usual, wanting to make some muffins and éclairs to sell at the bakery. Your first customers compliment your coffee and muffins, and you can’t help but wonder if your coffee is as bad as Barnes made it seem.

"What would you recommend to a new customer?" A man with a kind look, blue eyes, and blonde hair approaches your counter while you’re pulling a batch of fresh bread from the oven. He is muscular, well-built, and has a wonderful scent.

"I’d recommend almost everything here except the coffee; I’ve heard it’s not that great. And welcome to Y/L/N Bakery. My name is Y/N; I’m the owner and also the baker. If you want my honest recommendation, this new bread recipe turned out great, and I’ve made some éclairs if you’re interested in sweetening your day." you say subtly as you watch the man place his backpack on the floor of the bakery. It looks like he’s just arrived from a trip.

"My name is Steve. Steve Rogers. I heard that an old friend of mine used to frequent your bakery, and I came here hoping to find out where he might be. Have you by any chance seen Bucky?" Steve asks gently as he approaches the counter. You look at him thoughtfully.

"Who the hell is Bucky?" you ask, not quite understanding who he’s talking about. You’ve had many customers, but none named Bucky. Steve then pulls a photo of his friend from his pocket. Immediately, you recognize him. It’s Barnes, in military attire, in a photo that looks like it was taken a few years ago. And then you realize that Steve must be the best friend Barnes was talking about last night.

TO BE CONTINUED...

[wordsandrobots]

A couple of years ago, I attended a (virtual) conference where one of the main topics was the impact of so-called 'AI' tools on my particular industry. I work in scholarly publishing (on the publisher side -- I know, I know; for what it's worth, I am at least at a company that's actively trying to drive reform, is anti-impact factor, tries to reinforce the value of the work over the journal name, etc) and the application of 'generative AI' to facilitate plagiarism/fake papers is an obvious risk in this sector. Such software could easily be used to overwhelm the (meagre) defences journals have against such things, especially with the pressures placed on academics to get their work into 'high impact' publications above all else. The threat of 'paper-mills' (operations paid to seek publication by fraudulent means) ramping up via the use of ChatGP was clear and present amid those heady days of the initial hype-push.

What's stuck with me from that conference is a panel participant pointing out that 'AI' hasn't created any *new* problems; it's just accelerated existing ones. That is, fraud in science and science publishing has been an issue as long as scholarly publishing has existed as an industry. You don't need a fancy tool to generate you a fake paper. It helps, no doubt, but it's not a necessary step. And yes, it makes detection harder. But the actual solution here -- the way to put a stop to fake papers, dodgy authorship claims, and all the other variations on trying to beef up an academic's publication record for career gains -- doesn't lie in some technological arms-race between plagiarism-detection and paper-fabrication. We need to change the culture. We need to put a stop to the rewards for this kind of behaviour, by assessing academics by the actual value and quality of their research, without the proxy-step provided by place of publication.

(For the uninitiated, it is a huge problem in science that certain journals -- such as the big three of Nature, Cell and Science -- are seen as *the* place where groundbreaking research is published. Not only does this expose the English-language bias within global research, it creates the idea that to 'make it', you must publish somewhere like that, rather than just, you know, doing good solid work. Journals, big name or not, also have a history of selecting for headline-making research. So on the one hand, institutions are judging their employees' careers by their citations, not their work, and on the other, you absolutely cannot trust journals not to get dollar-signs in their eyes when someone comes along claiming that e.g. a certain vaccine actually causes an unrelated health condition. To pick a deliberate, very-specific example. On top of all this, peer review is *terrible* at catching faked results because it has to be approached in good-faith. Most of the time, fraud is only caught in hindsight, once the work has had time to circulate in the community, at which point wider damage has been done.)

Now, one of the reasons I haven't blogged much about so-called 'AI' is that my hatred for it is pre-rational. What I mean is, I hate 'generative AI' with the power of a thousand burning suns. I hate it on a conceptual level. The idea of feeding real people's work, their art, into a machine and have it churn out an approximation of that same work and art is abhorrent to me. I view it as a mockery of skills I have devoted my life to. If it could produce truly breathtaking imagery and crystal-sharp prose, I would still feel the same revulsion at the thought of removing intent from an act of communication, at the idea we should be content with bathetic mirrors in place of engaging with actual human beings and what they can do.

Separate from this, I believe there is good cause to be highly doubtful about the tools that have been pushed on the public over the last few years. I haven't used them myself (see above) but everything I've seen suggests they just aren't very good. It's painfully obvious how they can be/will be/are being used to devalue people's labour, thus strengthening corporations. There's the destruction of the information ecosystem that comes from integrating software intended to reproduce tone instead of facts into major search engines. There's the impact on the actual ecosystem of pouring resources and power into this technology. There's the simple detail that a lot of the people pushing this stuff are, frankly, just the worst.

However, I am extremely, painfully aware I am the wrong person to make rational arguments against these tools because what's actually driving my objection is disgust. I'm going to assume the worst about this particular kind of automation simply on the basis that I can't stand its existence.

There may be good, productive uses for this kind of technology! I can't tell you what they might be because I'm too busy looking for the bit where my worst opinions are validated. That's where I am on this. I actively have to guard my tongue around some of my colleagues, to keep from railing at how gullible I think they're being, buying into these things.

So yeah. Not a good place for making solid arguments. But that point from two years ago -- 'AI' is not creating any new problems.

I think it's easy to lose track of that. Consider the environmental impact. In order for you to read this, some server, somewhere, needs to be powered and cooled. The device you are reading this on is likely made from relatively rare materials that have a history of being source via destructive means (both to the environment and the people involved in the extraction process). I don't say that as a guilt-trip; I'm writing this via the same means. It's simply that the current landscape of our societies is dependent on things that comes at a cost to the planet and our fellow humans. That cost is made worse by rampant capitalism, but even under ideal conditions, mitigating it will require rethinking massive amounts of infrastructure.

This is not an excuse to make things worse. I want to be very clear about that. Nor am I claiming these issues are insoluble. It's simply a good example of 'AI' being an exaggerated case of an existing problem, namely how to balance the utility of modern communication technology against the extractive activity required to build it. As with many things, the glib answer is 'don't do capitalism' and, well, err, that kind of is the answer, reorientating away from the maximisation of profit above all else and from 'endless growth' doctrine. But crucially, that answer has nothing to do with 'AI'. If the hype-train collapsed tomorrow and everyone realised they've been buying snake-oil, and somehow the tech sector didn't collectively burn to the ground about it, we'd still have a problem to solve.

Because the problem isn't new.

That 'summarisation' tool Google or Adobe have swung on you, that shortens text with no regard for the actual information contained within what it's reducing is not some novel horror; it's just an acceleration of the same approach to design that sees 'engagement' as the primary driver, detached from what is actually materially happening to cause everyone to flock to a single place. MidJourney or what-have-you, allowing X or Y group to churn out endless cloying representations of their ideal reality, is just bad Photoshop composites with less effort required on the part of the person pushing the button. People will airbrush reality whether they have to do it with a prompt or an actual airbrush. We know this! Thomas Kinkade made a whole flipping career off it! It's the heart of mass-media advertising, to cheaply reproduce visions of simpler worlds for the sake of selling you something.

The truth is, grifters are going to grift, with whatever tools they have at their disposal. As long as there is a market for snake-oil, an incentive to cheat, a reason for people to be dissatisfied with their lot, there is going to be space for someone to sell an everything-app. A quick solution. An easy fix. We don't address that by playing whack-a-mole with every single dumb vapourware 'solution' that results; we address it by collapsing the space that permits those things to find their marks.

I think it is an objectively bad thing if paper-mills can work faster and easier and flood journal submissions with more junk than ever before. But it is also objectively bad for academia to be held hostage by a for-profit system that silos and constrains their work while being treated as the bar for judging how well they are doing their jobs. And the latter is the problem that actually *needs* to be solved, if we're going to have a hope of addressing the former.

Anyway, thank you for coming to this edition of 'Words sorts through his disgust to work out if there's a sensible position obscured beneath, for the sake of not being a raging arsehole to people who like shiny toys and haven't been in a love-hate relationship with their ability to draw for thirty years'.

[absolutebl]

Hi!

I love your Blog and love to read your takes in everything. So thank you so much for all your Posts and thoughts about the industry etc.

Here is my question: i came across one of your posts where you wrote "actually gay, not bl gay" (it was a Post about Jojo and Only Friends) and while I FELT that I TOTALLY understood what you meant and instantly was like "yes 100% clear" Id love to read and learn more about what this means exactly and why some bls feel quite heteronormative while some dont. Would you mind explain the take on "actually gay Not Bl gay" a little bit? And why some Shows feel just more queer than others (besides the unbelievable stupid "gay only for you" trope lol)

Thank you so much and I hope you will have a nice day!

actually gay, not bl gay

There's actually quite a discourse on this right now mostly originating with @waitmyturtles and @wen-kexing-apologist (Post @killiru references above is here.)

I tend to mostly talk about this in broad brush strokes as a queer lens.

But there's a great ven diagram (which of course I've lost the link to) that approaches the idea of and queer lens by tunneling into its approach and intent:

about queers

by queers

for queers

How do different BLs intersect in different ways with these three elements?

When I said "actually gay, not BL gay" I was alluding to this discourse. Specifically the "about queers" category of BL.

There are characters in BL who read as genuinely gay (as in belonging to the queer family of this terrible reality we live in) and then there are those that seem more performative (to exist in a bubble of fantasy were sexual identity is almost unimportant, only the romance matters, everything is safe sweetness & light). For some queers this can read as manipulative or even exploitive (because it is inauthentic to most queer experiences). For me, it's fine... even desirable. I like the safe bubble. I enjoy the utter delusional escapism of it. Sometimes I will call this sanitized gay. (Since it is designed to make gay palatable to non-gay identified folks e.g. seme/uke.)

A sanitized gay BL may be unintentional but it is nested in origin yaoi and mm romance whose target market has never been the queer community, and whose authors have historically not been members of it, either.

Let's be frank, we queers are generally a terrible target market, we don't have enough spending power - especially not for a piece of pop culture as niched as BL. And as creators we really want our voices to be heard (obvs), which makes us produce content that those unsympathetic or uncaring find uncomfortable. (Yes, I know, fuck them, but also, they have all the money and the entertainment industry is a numbers game.)

So in the arena of office romances, just as an example:

actually gay = The New Employee

sanitized gay = Our Dating Sim

actual gay = Step By Step

sanitized gay = A Boss And a Babe

All of the above have the same tropes, archetypes, and premises. All of them are BL. Some are just... queerer feeling than others. And the characters in those shows (Step by Step and The New Employee) read as more "actually gay."

This has nothing to do with the actors, chemsitry, or how much we may personally like the show (Our Dating Sim is one of my absolute favorite BLs). It has to do with how closely those CHARACTERS intersect with the reality of queerness as we inhabit it today. It will be lots of little touches given to the drama by director and script:

language use,

surrounding friendships (and friendship style),

mannerisms and physicality (specially body language around straights vs other queer characters),

makeup & wardrobe,

facial expressions,

surrounding queer-coded behaviors by side characters,

layers of story nuance that indicate a complicated queer-driven back story.

Markers of specifically a queer identity are given to the leads.

These kinds of BLs are satisfying the "about queers" category. ("By queers" can be difficult to extract because IRL outting is involved. "For queers" is the rarest kind of BL, because making something specifically for us often alienates the majority of the rest of viewership/market. I could be argued that SCOY did this.)

I'm sure I've missed things, but I hope that kinda makes sense?

By/For/About discourse from @wen-kexing-apologist here:

Parts 1

Part 2

Part 3

I'm indebted to them for the links!

More Queer Stuff from Yours Truly

BL Linguistics & Queer Identity - I Am Gay versus I Like Men 

Will BL Get More Honestly Queer? 

Queer lens (from the director) and chemistry (from the actors) in BL (A Tale of Thousand Stars)

Touch & Daisy in Secret Crush On You - Queer Coded Language and 3rd Gender Identity

BL in Taiwan & Gay Marriage

Debating Queerbaiting in BL ( + Devil Judge... is it queerbaiting?) 

BL Actors and the Assumption of Queerness - outing actors, coming out, being out, more:  Is that BL actor actually queer?

So is it really fetishization? straight women loving bl 

Some BL fans are sasaengs, and it’s a problem in this fandom 

BLs That Highlight How Society Treats Queers

10 BLs That Are Honest to a Queer Experience 

(source)

[sabrinahawthorne]

CLASH! Devlog, September 4, 2024 - Mastery Rework and NPCs

Sorry for the long absence, everyone - I'm back on the horse and I have developments.

Stats are called Stances!

I just want to get this one out of the way - I've been looking for a bespoke term for this since I drafted the original prototype, and I finally landed on language I like.

Mastery Rework

I've been having trouble with the Powerhouse's Playbook progression mechanic - I have a very clear idea of the narrative moment I want to emulate, but nothing I've thought of has really jived with the universal Mastery Mechanic. Eventually, I realized it was because there was a problem with Mastery itself.

(If you don't remember how Mastery works, you can read about it here.)

So to clean it up, I've altered how Mastery works, just a little. It used to be that you gain a point of Mastery whenever you used a Tech that you're currently learning (previously called Unmastered, now called Imperfect). That Mastery would then automatically be invested into the used Tech, until you finished learning it.

Not so any more. instead, Mastery now functions more like XP in other games. It's earned in a number of circumstances - activating Imperfect Techs and activating Relationship Techs, among others. From there, you have some choices about where you spend your Mastery. You can invest it into learning new Techs, but you can also spend it to improve your Stances, or even give it away to give an ally some extra Potential.

From here, I was able to actually implement the Powerhouse's Progression mechanic! But I won't get into that here - you'll have to read it for yourself.

NPCs

Does anyone else get scared of writing GM-facing rules? It's not a rational fear; it just feels overwhelming every time I have to write them out for a new game. Especially so in this case.

A particularly daunting hurdle in the case of CLASH! has been NPCs. This is a game about combat against interesting, developed characters, which means that I somehow need to make playing multiple complex NPCs manageable for the GM. It's been eating at me for months.

The solution came in three parts: Traits, Types, and Tiers.

Among the three, the only term that carries any mechanical weight are Traits - but All three are useful pieces of language.

Traits are simple tags attached to some NPCs which describe their motivations and behavior. They aren't Techs; they don't describe a character's powers or weaknesses. Instead, they're about a character's priorities, both in and out of combat. For example:

Or, something more specific to combat:

These serve several purposes. First and most significant is that they make managing a potentially large cast of antagonists easier on the GM. Every important NPC has a list of personality traits that inform their actions, and those traits are written down, so if you ever forget that one bad guy's whole deal, you can just double check.

It also means that running combat is simpler. The GM doesn't need to worry about a characters actions being consistent - they essentially have a very simple AI to follow - a set of procedures that generate consistent behavior and tactics for their baddies. Hopefully.

I also anticipate that this will add an additional layer for the players, who I hope will have a lot of fun deducing the priorities and strategies of their opponents, and finding interesting ways to take advantage of that knowledge.

Types are a soft distinction between two styles of NPC. It doesn't make sense for every rando the Fighters encounter to have fully fledged Stances and Techs to use - that's simply too much work to put on the GM. So instead, the majority of NPCs are what I'm calling Noncombatants - their more complex counterparts of course being Combatants.

Combatants are the ones with Stances, Techs, and Traits. They're any NPC you expect might be getting in a fight with the PCs, and any Noncombatant can be hooked up with some of the above if the need arises. But Noncombatants just have a name, some pronouns, and a listed motivation. If you want, you can even use a Trait or two for this - but you don't have to.

Finally, Tiers are essentially a way to make constructing Combatants easier. The tiers are Goon, Lieutenant, and Boss. With one or two minor rules exceptions (Goons will flee when they lose a Contest), these are all identical - it's just that each tier has better stats and more personality than the ones below them. Lieutenants are more colorful and interesting than Goons, etc.

This manifests really simply - higher Stances, more Techs, and more Traits. It's just an easy way to create a hierarchy of villains that ranges from your average nondescript Soul Reapers, to your Captain Alvidas, to your Orochimarus.

I've got another Devlog coming this week! It's smaller than this one, but I figured I'd keep engagement high and split the updates up just a little to keep people reading.

If this is your first time hearing about CLASH!, you can check out the open beta play materials Here! And keep that link open - I'm working on an updated booklet with more cool stuff.

[sonkitty]

The Earthly Objects Game (Good Omens 2)

Find the newest Earthly Objects material here: The Earthly Objects Game ... "You can't just manifest and cause trouble, there are rules." -Crowley, Good Omens 2, Episode 5 (The Ball)

(Crowley was blurry from the back when he really said that so the above screenshot is from the lines right before)

This post was last updated 01/10/2024.

Much of this post is some heavily involved theorizing. However, the Threshold Tricks existing actually supports a lot of this theorizing. I make mistakes nonetheless. Please keep that in mind. I am still confident in the Threshold Tricks, if nothing else.

The Game

This story has rules or at least some notable patterns resembling an expected script from its characters. We're going to call them "rules" for now and acknowledge that rules can and most certainly will be broken.

Crowley and Aziraphale have a heightened awareness of these rules compared to everyone else, at least in the present day and in this story. I will be focusing my attention there since the minisodes are more difficult to follow for me. Who made the rules? It could be them or God or a book or game they've been put into. I refer to this thing as a game because that's more my understanding of it than what it actually is. Most characters aren't really playing. They follow the rules on instinct.

Even season 1 has certain resembling factors to this game that I found. God at least did use the phrase "ineffable game" herself.

Both Crowley and Aziraphale are experts, but Crowley is astoundingly impressive at how he plays this game.

I call the game Earthly Objects due to the use of that phrase in episode 1 and the touching even shown during that segment. Plus, of what the mechanics of this game seem to do. If this game has another name, it is The Rule of Three, or something like that. The number 3 is vital to this game.

Points

The way the game seems to work is that, for a great deal of the story, it wants 3 points to start a scene. Some scenes even get chains of three points, but such chains are quite hard to spot.

When two characters interact, the story usually wants each of them to earn one point of that given set.

When it comes to a solo scene, the story still wants 3 points from that one character.

Points are simplifying things, and even simplified, they are dependent on context, timing, and placement around thresholds.

Things grow ever more complex with more characters involved.

Earthly Objects

Earth has objects, often thought of by humans as tangible objects. In this story, earthly does not mean solid, and touch does not mean direct skin or clothing contact. They are the most easily evident and likely common methods. The touch depends on how it is done and the nature of the object in question. Checking a watch for the time is an earthly object touch because that is how you use a watch on Earth.

We see three earthly objects in the show's opening before Earth even exists. Those objects are a crank, a scroll, and a book. One of them, the book, is touched through a supernatural method but still touched.

One touched earthly object is equal to one point. It can be held during a character interaction and still count in many contexts.

These are basic earthly objects, for a few examples; see more at the end:

Chairs

Windows

Tables

Walls

Books

Mirrors

Cups

Doorknobs

Bodies of living natural beings (humans and goats for example)

Blurs

Blurs seem to indicate a possible pass or share when studying how windows work.

When a character is blurred, that seems to mean a pass or that the next clear view of them will confirm the results of their touch during the preceding blur.

Thresholds

Thresholds are largely understood to be doors.

Most characters in Good Omens 2 will not concern themselves with the intricacies of only the door part that serves as the door. They'll just use the doorknob, get their point, and move on—provided the camera saw it, that is.

This story has other non-door thresholds, such as the edge of the sidewalk.

Crowley, one of the show's two main characters, does concern himself with the above-mentioned intricacies. It goes well beyond anything we see other characters do in the entire season. For example, he is capable of doing what I have decided to call Multiplicative Threshold Tricks.

Here is a post I made on the subject:

Earthly Objects Study - Multiplicative Threshold Tricks (Good Omens 2).

These are an incredibly special type of set compared to how the usual points are earned on earthly objects themselves. If the points system really is as simple as 3 total for one set, then the Threshold Tricks require a minimum of 6 points due to their involvement with thresholds.

Aziraphale may not manipulate thresholds on the same level, but he is aware and involved in at least some of the Tricks. In fact, at the story's end, he actually has his own part to play after The Door Trick is complete. I believe it is supposed to be called The Door Catch.

To further clarify and return to other matters, characters can touch earthly objects on thresholds, such as doorknobs, door handles, push plates, shades, windows, mirrors, the astragal for double doors, and so on. The panel serving its function as mainly the door itself is different. It can be touched...but it's not an earthly object touch. It is the threshold itself or enough of the threshold itself to not be considered earthly.

Thresholds seem to require certain timing that I definitely haven't watched every scene to log as if the interaction happened properly or not. The main thing I can say is that a lot of "Hello" lines happen while a character is crossing a threshold (or maintaining place in one), before the sound effect of a door closing completes.

Windows have a remarkable threshold component different from doors and will have a link explaining such further down.

Vary Technique

The story does not want the characters to use the same exact technique twice on the same type of earthly object touch to earn a point, in a different later scene. It can be similar but should have some variation. An easy example is Shax knocks on the window using her knuckles at Crowley’s car, then later knocks on a window to the bookshop with just an index finger.

I most certainly have not verified this, just noticed subtle variations when looking for these things. Crowley's Threshold Tricks have a pattern that I do believe is intended to be, "Never do the same trick twice."

Awareness

I'm convinced Crowley and Aziraphale are aware of the rules and making choices about them, but that doesn't mean they know every move they are making that is following the rules.

When Crowley shoots out lightning in episode 1, the lightning itself still actually follows the rules with three different touches on the door to the coffee shop. I don't think Crowley did that on purpose or even knows it happened. But it did happen.

Still, his choices in most, or at least quite a bit, of his movement during the story do appear to be deliberate choices.

Earth

The surface upon which characters stand and walk is the Earth. They can touch the Earth to earn a point, but it requires a little more effort, such as hopping. The hopping might require the feet touch the ground at different times.

Let's check in with our experts.

Crowley hops in place in episode 1 before shooting out lightning. He also hops while talking to Muriel before the scene ends in episode 6. In both cases, the feet do not touch the ground at the same time.

Aziraphale deliberately avoids a point in episode 6 when he makes sure to step backwards off a rug onto the floor in episode 6. No points for stepping backwards onto Earth. Or at least he didn't earn a point for walking partly on a rug.

When Crowley is walking on the sidewalk and passing by the coffee shop in episode 1, he does the following to earn two points, not even in the same set believe it or not. The first thing he does is rotate his body, such that his left foot is fully on the ground, but his right foot isn't. Instead, only the heel touches the ground. As such, he gets the point because the heel is touching the ground. He's not just standing. After he fixes the power, the camera shows that his left foot is already off the sidewalk and moving to the road. He gets a point for the step because he's not just walking on the sidewalk, then the road. He's stepping from the sidewalk to the road. It might help that the edge of a sidewalk is a threshold. His second step after crossing the threshold has the foot conveniently cut off from the camera.

What about running? The only example I can think of is Crowley running as he enters the bookshop but then he seems to shift into a skip. The camera doesn't see both feet fully the whole time though. So, for that one, I'm not really sure.

Clothing and Accessories

Clothing is regarded as enough of a character's self that just wearing clothes is not enough. They can earn points for touching their clothes actively during a scene, such as Nina touching her clothes while talking to Crowley in episode 5 after he comments on the name of her coffee shop.

Not any touch will do. It seems it also must be done in specific ways.

Crowley has a special way that he uses his pants pockets for The Pocket Trick. That way is really, really hard to understand. I can't keep up. However, from what I do understand, the threshold-only touch is not during the entire cut. There is a puzzle to solve and find the actual threshold-only touch within a given frame or few frames.

As such, when he's not at that exact point, he seems regarded as touching his clothes as an earthly object touch based on two interactions he has in episode 2.

In episode 2, he is walking with his hand in his pocket and thumb out. As he moves, the back of his jacket is touching over his hand. Soon after, Nina initiates an interaction with him. Not long after that, he's walking again and encounters Aziraphale. Crowley himself speaks. At that point, the touch comes from behind the hand.

Aziraphale, I think, puts his hands in and out of his pockets in episode 1, not instantly, so not sure if in, out, or both would count.

Accessories probably also depend on how and when they are touched.

Crowley’s sunglasses are a special type of accessory, so here is a post with more extensive info:

Earthly Object Study - Crowley’s Sunglasses (Good Omens 2)

In short, sometimes the sunglasses can be used as an accessory for the game but not always.

Due to how the story ends, I suspect the clothing and accessory rules are not as simple as just letting two interacting characters to touch only such things with a scene as extensive as the bookshop scene between Crowley and Aziraphale at the end of episode 6. The story cares about context, and there is some big time context happening in that scene.

Humans

Humans are earthly objects. As such, they can do self-touches, such as clasping their hands. Again, not any touch will do. It probably has to be done in a specific way, not that many humans would have this issue.

Maggie is the show's prime example as she uses this method quite frequently. She might be a special type of human based on other things we observe in the show, but the story considers her human enough to allow this method nonetheless.

Supernatural Beings

If a supernatural being is actively touching an earthy object, they can, like humans, do self-touches. I am sometimes not sure if they already can, but Crowley's self-touches during the ball invitations in episode 5 strongly suggest this idea is true. For when it seems like they are not touching anything, there is probably something else specifically within the scene that's allowing it anyway.

Miracle touches onto earthly objects are allowed. Crowley changing three traffic lights from red to green at the same time? That's an earthly object touch.

Supernatural beings are allowed reciprocal touches between each other, such as a fist bump or holding hands. Kissing is probably allowed though the one kiss shown has exceptional circumstances with a lot of other touching deliberately not happening.

Windows

Windows are easy to overlook because once you do take the time to study them in their more complex use, they are by no means easy to understand.

Here's a messy post about mostly a few more complex scenes involving windows:

Earthly Objects Study - Windows

Here is another one focused on how The Window Trick is done:

Earthly Objects Study - Windows Part 2 (Good Omens 2)

I didn't know it was The Window Trick when I wrote it.

Chairs

Aziraphale has a mysterious vendetta against the backs of chairs ever since Gabriel interrupted Aziraphale from listening to music. The chair he sits in when talking to Crowley about wanting help looking after Gabriel seems to be the main exception.

Aziraphale's got no visible back of a chair in the coffee shop or the pub, maybe other places, and even in the bookshop, when he is sitting in a chair, his back is not in the back of the chair most or all of the time. I don’t care enough to confirm every scene. It's weird.

This mystery suggests there is a point for the back to the chair that he is simply adamant to not earn. I am not sure if and how this is related to Varying Technique mentioned above.

There are plenty of other ways to earn points from chairs. It mainly needs to make sense for how a chair would be touched, such as using an arm rest.

Knock

Knocking on a window probably earns a point, provided the camera sees it. When Gabriel knocks on the door in episode 1? Not sure. The camera saw it, but the eventual response takes awhile. A blur might make it a pass. It's hard to tell.

Hands

Hands are complex and apparently there might be rules about the number of digits used on certain types of touches. If the touch is standard for one index finger and one index finger and thumb, it's probably fine.

Otherwise, generally check for at least 3 digits for one hand, at least 6 for two hands. Watch how the fingers are extended, curled, or consistency with each other. If you like trying to figure out this game, it actually does help you to see how the instinctual players still play differently from each other. Michael is far more likely to extend their fingers and use them broadly than Uriel, for example.

Crowley messes with this rule a lot. It seems he cares which touch is credited how. It’s not enough to earn points. It goes something like the park bench should earn the point so the newspaper can act as his own personal threshold until he decides otherwise.

Thumb tips are particularly important when it comes to managing thresholds.

I don't know if I'll ever figure the hand mechanics out fully myself.

Dialogue Points

Most interactions will not have both characters touching something. Instead, the characters follow dialogue patterns for the other points.

They tend to go something like the following:

Hello

Questions

Names

Statement of Place (might just be an extended form of "Hello")

Foreign Language

Combinations of hello, names, and questions are common. Two questions might even be enough for two points.

Hello

When Aziraphale enters the record shop for the first time in episode 1, he touches the window of the door twice, and says "Hello Maggie," before the sound effect of the door closing completes.

When Maggie enters the coffee shop, using the doorknob, Nina says "Hello" while holding plates with cups and before the sound effect of the door closing completes.

Equivalents such as "Hi there," are allowed.

"Excuse me," the show's opening words, are probably also allowed.

Question

"Yes? Was that you?"

"Seats? Mr. Fell, where are the seats I dropped off for the meeting?"

"Who are you? Who sent you?"

"What are you doing?"

Names

Titles in place of names seem to be acceptable.

"I don't know why you invited me, Mr. Fell."

"Officer, I need to report a crime."

"Jim, I'll need eight battery-operated candles."

Statement of Place

“I’m here.”

“I’m back.”

“You’re back.”

“You’re in trouble.”

“Oh, we’re going to the pub! You never go to the pub!”

“We are at war! Finally.”

"I think you know why we're here."

Statements such as these seem to be regarded as a type of "Hello". "I'm here" is said by Gabriel once he's opened the doors to the bookshop and steps out. When Aziraphale says, "You came back," to Crowley in episode 6, the doors are still open and closed just after he says it. He is otherwise not touching anything, not saying a question, not saying a number, not saying a name, and not speaking in a foreign language.

When Shax says, "You're in trouble," the window is open.

The "We are at war!" line is after the doors are closed, but since Dagon is in the group with Beelzebub who enters with fire, that seems to be the acceptable form of an earthly object touch combined with this "Hello" from Hell.

Numbers

If characters can say numbers, and I am increasingly convinced they can, that's a lot they can get away with. Numbers are everywhere, just like names and questions.

Foreign Language

When watching the show in English, characters talking in a foreign language is, I think, touching an earthly object. It's significant enough that Mrs. Cheng never has to touch anything except a fan when she is at the ball and talking in English.

Groups

Blurs make this harder to understand now that I know blurs exist and seem to have some kind of pass or share effect.

The story's going to go by some level of context with who is in the scene.

For something like the scene in the bookshop with the powers of Heaven and Hell, those groups are of 3 or more characters.

For that it, seemed only one character from a group is required to initiate the interaction on a group’s behalf. In episode 6, Crowley represents himself and the four angels who came with him. He does a hello and a question through an open threshold. The touch will come soon but not yet. Aziraphale says, “You’re back,” and then gets to represent the group of him, Jim/Gabriel, Maggie, and Nina. Muriel, who was in the group with Crowley, closes the doors. Crowley touches Shax’s shoe while Shax is unconscious on the couch. As such, Crowley gets the earthly object touch on the couch through Shax or on the shoe thanks to Shax being on a couch. For all I know, he gets both.

Dagon, Furfur, and Beelzebub arrive. I think Beelzebub’s fire is supposed to be an earthly object touch for their group, and Dagon says, “We are at war!” If I’m right, this third group still needed an earthly object touch, possibly because the doors were closed by that point. Additionally, when Beelzebub awakens Shax with lightning, Shax ends up both touching the couch and having books fall on her, so she gets touches in as well.

Chains

Chains exist in this game, as already noted.

Sometimes you'll see the three points to start a scene, then you might actually see another immediate or at least relatively soon three points, and so on.

They are really hard to spot, so I'm skeptical it's a full-scale requirement for the game, but it's much more dominant than I realized. Or, the dialogue makes it hard to spot because some dialogue is allowed to carry on instead of the non-dialogue touches. I don't know why that happens for some scenes and not others.

The most obvious chain I've seen, that led me to believe they exist, is the scene between Crowley and Gabriel in episode 5 when Gabriel is fiddling with the lamp.

Upon first realizing there might be a chain there, I thought that might makes it one of the most real scenes to the story even if Crowley might have an underlying intent to draw out his own demonic energy there. That also came from observing some basic rule-breaking that I'll note further down.

Then again, maybe not. I believe the scene with Crowley shooting out lightning is part of a chain too, but it's far more complex because of the window. There are still some notably suspicious fake things happening in the background once Nina realizes she and Maggie are locked in.

Zoomed Touches

Do not trust these things at face value, even if they are mostly avoided in the latter half of episode 6. I think most of them are supposed to be valid, but there are at least two you should not trust before that point.

Don't trust the zoom on Crowley's sunglasses next to a plate of Eccles cakes, even if there are three fingers visibly and clearly picking them up. There was a fake Crowley before that, and even the real Crowley is only holding them with two digits initially upon exiting through the bookshop doors as he puts them on. After a human passes by, then he switches to holding the sunglasses with more digits. That human is the hint of where the fake sequence ends.

The other zoom to not trust is Crowley holding the box in episode 6. Once he turns that box over, his thumb is avoiding touching it on purpose. He has the index and middle fingers together with their tips. Meanwhile, the ring finger can be found on camera but is deliberately separate from the other two and not clearly showing its tip.

In both cases, I think touches likely happened, but those are supposed to be a way of the story telling on its own deception. Gabriel probably arrived with a cardboard box at least twice. In the first draft of the story, the message written on the box may have been different.

Illusionary Touches

These things are new to me since I only noticed them when studying pocket touches. In The Pocket Trick, Crowley can't just do an illusionary touch whenever or wherever. He has to meet certain requirements involving timing and framing.

Theoretically, if such things are allowed for earthly objects, they are not as strict. However, I don't have much to go on and never really noticed. I had assumed things you would know would be an illusion, would not actually count.

Crowley's Name

Crowley's name usage, or lack thereof, is just flat out odd in the whole story, but if there is a rule, it's something like neither Crowley nor Gabriel are ever allowed to say Crowley's name. No exceptions.

For Crowley, this theoretical rule applies to all time periods shown in the season 2 story.

For more on just how odd the usage is, please see my post here. Be sure to check my own reblogs to that post as well.

Players Section Link

Sideburns

I don't mention the sideburns much in this entire post since I have a whole other extensive post about them. However, they are relevant to this game in that whatever is going on with them uses the mechanics of Earthly Objects. Even so, it seems to be its own game with a scheme at work from both Crowley and Aziraphale. You can find more here: The Sideburns Scheme.

Rule Following

A fascinating example I've found of rule-following by Crowley and Aziraphale is when Muriel intrudes on them. I can’t fully explain the mechanics of the rules because like I said, I really do think Crowley is an expert at this game. Whatever is happening here is advanced stuff. I'm going to walk you through what he does to get this scene where it needs to go. He does it with style.

Before Muriel intrudes, Aziraphale had already made sure to have a cup of tea visibly touching his hands to start the scene in the room. Crowley poses to indicate he is touching a blurred stack of books in the room, even if Aziraphale's body obscures confirmation of that touch while Aziraphale closes the door. Crowley's left arm is shown as him placing a hand on his hip. During their conversation, Crowley's right arm keeps telling us he's still touching that stack and not moving away from it. Blurs, I believe at this point, allow a pass, and so this one seems to be allowing some kind of pass and then hold so long as Crowley keeps at it.

The story lets him without confirming that is the touch on camera. We are never going to see that confirmation. He displays his left arm and even says, "One fabulous kiss, and we're good," as if that's a clue he is allowed that one time to show that one arm until a certain thing is going to happen. That left arm returns to implying its previous touch as well.

Crowley has an earthly object prepared for the scene. He fully intends to give over those keys despite his grumbling. It might be very important that the car keys earn a specific point because they move the story along.

Ready for the pass, he has those keys in his left hand, skin contact and all, perhaps a little blurry on a camera from behind him, but still, he's got them.

Muriel opens the door, crosses past the threshold of this private conversation, and says, "All done?" No earthly objects. No hello. No knocking. We have an outright intrusion here! At least there was a question, but it might not have been enough due to what Crowley does.

Crowley pulls the keys back toward himself immediately. From the view behind Muriel, his pose is returned to match what it was when Aziraphale closed the door at the start of the scene even though Muriel's blocking the blurred stack of books.

Aziraphale's frustrated because of the rules. Crowley is going to do several things to handle this situation.

First, Crowley smiles and answers Muriel, then asks Muriel about being interested in humans being in love. That’s a question. Then he even stops Muriel from saying names. He's saying the names himself, so his implied hold with both arms might be allowing him to keep dragging out a lot of the dialogue until he gets what he wants. Assuredly, Aziraphale seeming to get quite turned on by this talk is about the love, but he's also watching the master of this game at work.

Eventually, Muriel brings out a notepad and pen. That's two earthly objects. Between both Muriel and Crowley, that interaction meets the requirements, regardless of the initiating question from the whole intrusion. Aziraphale has kept quiet the whole time though he at least smiles. Crowley's left arm readies itself for what comes next. His right arm is still implying the touch behind him.

Muriel's eyes move their attention from Crowley to the notepad. Spanning only a few frames after this shift, Crowley's blurred hand shows the keys for the touch and tosses the keys toward Aziraphale. Without checking frame by frame, it looks instant based on the notepad, not the eye movement from Muriel. He knew exactly what he was doing.

Aziraphale manages the catch, thankfully. You can tell he was nervous and is grateful. He winks. That gives one point to him for the keys in his hand and another point for the wink as a self-touch since he’s a supernatural being holding an earthly object. The pair need one last point.

Muriel's attention remains on their notepad for the entire toss.

Crowley's right arm maintains its implied touch throughout the entire scene, even after the toss is done. He does one last thing to close it all out. He gives a sour grimace to allow his cheeks an active touch on his new sunglasses. At least, I think that's how the sequence is intended to be.

So, my current guess is that the scene is three different interactions. The first is between Aziraphale and Crowley. They already had their points but the story doesn’t want just points (or, as noted, the implied touch may have allowed some kind of hold). Those keys needed a relevant pass between these two players. Muriel’s intrusion reset things, so that another interaction of three points between Crowley and Aziraphale was necessary.

Crowley takes over to be the one character to interact with Muriel, get them their own points without involving the keys in this intentionally isolated interaction. His precise timing is impressive. Then there’s the third sequence covered above (keys, wink, grimace). To help keep these interactions separate, Muriel should not see the pass.

Rule Breaking - Basic

Likely Fake Crowley, who is probably Aziraphale, passing a cardboard box and no dialogue is breaking the rules. Soon after is a blurry figure who I’m guessing is still a fake. The figure picks up sunglasses and avoids an obvious plate of Eccles cakes. These cuts are likely part of an edit. There are two earthly objects emphatically not touched. Gabriel is nowhere to be found, but the more clear fake had long sideburns. In the next bookshop scene, the plate has disappeared, and the cardboard box has been moved.

Crowley, Saraqael, and Muriel walking to the Heaven elevator is likely an edit because it also breaks the rules. There are no earthly object touches, no dialogue, and suddenly Michael and Uriel are in the elevator later. That one's probably obvious to others, but still. There were no touches is my point. Crowley didn't hop or run, and Saraqael never takes their finger off their joystick for their wheelchair. There were even avoided touches in the cut right before it. I have a gut feeling that Saraqael is not an expert but at least a little more attuned to these rules and would earn a touch point if they wanted. And Crowley certainly knows his way around on earning these points when he wants.

Rule Breaking and High Tier Play - The Final Fifteen

The rules of standard play and high tier play are contradictory, but I'm still going to say "rule-breaking" because I think it is important and fair in full context of what happens. There are touches, but things are still considerably different due to what is touched when. There is definitely a lack of touching on the number of earthly objects in the bookshop itself and even the street later.

Of the touches that do happen in the bookshop and street later, the kiss excluded, most of those are actually Crowley following the rules on the hidden higher tier of play on thresholds for his Threshold Tricks. You should read that link if you want to know more about what the tricks actually are.

The two main characters are the main ones breaking the rules though the Metatron is at least partially doing so as well. His play is completely off compared to everyone. Other characters will be shown, and they will be shown as still following the rules even though they have no further dialogue.

The rule-breaking seems to start when the Metatron looks toward the bookshop after talking to Muriel. If he's looking through a window, the story has decided we don't need a complex window scene then or during the entire conversation in the bookshop.

The first touch is a threshold-only one with Crowley removing his sunglasses. If my theory on the Sunglasses Trick is correct, that is actually the next-to-last touch Crowley is doing for the first of three Threshold Tricks that will complete by the end of the episode, after he completed two others before this latter half of episode 6.

However, the Sunglasses Trick is an extensive and questionable theory, even moreso than the tricks that follow it. What if it's wrong? Even if not wrong and partly for the trick to begin with, the nature of the touch is still notably different from the rest of the story and worth pointing out.

Threshold-only touches on the sunglasses have a general format that isn't like what is happening here. The sunglasses are usually detached from Crowley onto an earthly object if he removes them. If he does keep holding them or is not seen putting them on an earthly object, there are three preceding instances of a subtle demonic hiss to indicate he is using them as a demon addressing an angel, two of which happened in the present day with Gabriel.

Here, Crowley holds his sunglasses and will keep holding them until he puts them back on. There will be no demonic hiss. They are his door, and he is holding his door. They are emphatically not an earthly object or touching an earthly object by extension during his entire conversation with Aziraphale.

Both characters touch their clothes nervously but not in ways the rules seem to allow, such as how they manage their pockets.

Neither Crowley nor Aziraphale say hello or acknowledge that Aziraphale is back. Crowley skips straight ahead to having something to say that doesn't have the usual format. There is no name, no question, and so on. He even acknowledges they should be "talking about" and cuts himself off.

Aziraphale interrupts him, does include a question, but then actually answers it himself.

Most questions are given more care in allowing the other character a chance to respond.

Still, nothing they weren't already wearing is touched.

Soon after the usual initiating set of rules are broken, the cohesion of the story's narrative is broken. The present day has intentionally been moving the audience between one scene and the next to suggest events are following a given implied chronology and timeline of a few days. Gabriel arrived on Monday. Crowley looked exceptionally hot in a black turtleneck on Tuesday. Aziraphale went to Edinburgh on Wednesday. The ball was prepared for and happened on Thursday. They are currently experiencing things on this Friday.

We've had flashbacks since the start leading closer and closer to the present day, but not a single one of those flashbacks started in this manner of a present day narration to start the flashback. They've been memories playing out between the present day events. The other present day events have been mentioned in dialogue, not narrated. We go to a very recent scene that supposedly happened without us seeing it. Then Aziraphale chops it even more. "And I said, 'Me'? And then he said..." What kind of cut is that?! Broken I tell you. It's broken. Not with exact wording. I'm just pointing out the standard cohesion of the narrative before this point is emphatically broken here—maybe even on purpose. Even setting aside this game idea, we as the audience, are supposed to notice how jarring it is. It gives a heavy implication that Aziraphale is lying.

I question a lot of the dialogue throughout the scene, but it's too much for me and not really the focus with the touching and lacking touching.

Before the kiss happens, there is another threshold touch. Crowley puts his sunglasses back on. The thresholds to Crowley's sunglasses are the end pieces. He doesn't touch those as best can be managed but what he does touch is specifically the areas around them. Two fingers in front and back of each end piece with each hand. He is being protective of his door to the point he touched the thresholds of his own thresholds.

He could have chosen any number of other places to touch those sunglasses, but he chose there.

Additionally, this touch closes out the Sunglasses Trick, that started as far back as episode 1, if my theory on that trick has any merit. That is the first of his three Threshold Tricks for the end of the season. He started with opening both doors. Now he is closing both doors.

More dialogue is exchanged with no earthly object touches in between.

Finally, the kiss happens. By all appearances, it is an impulsive choice. Yet, that choice resembles a set if clothing touches were acceptable. Crowley grabs the lapels of Aziraphale's coat. That's touch #1. They kiss, and the kiss is reciprocated. That's touch #2. Aziraphale's hand touches Crowley's back with four fingers visible. That's touch #3. Aziraphale's nose might even be touching Crowley's sunglasses, but those things are a guarded door (so far as I'm concerned).

They make a connection with the kiss. This game is almost like a language they understand between each other. For me, the kiss is more about their love than rule-following or rule-breaking.

To remind themselves and/or us that rule-breaking is happening here, the scene immediately continues with an implied quick glance to the window by Aziraphale and continued rule-breaking in the dialogue ("I forgive you.";"Don't bother"). No further words are exchanged. Crowley leaves with a heavy implication of touching the door yet the doorknob is ever so carefully obscured from view as the sound effects inform us he left. Still, nothing they weren't already wearing was touched.

More happens. The Metatron returns, visibly using a doorknob, so there's an earthly object touch by him. However, everything's still a little off. Aziraphale happens to move his feet in specific ways around a small rug until there is a step backwards from it to the floor. He walks backwards onto a big rug, then does not move forward until the camera is no longer watching his feet.

The Metatron takes one hand out of a pocket to gesture toward a window, and the camera never shows when the hand goes back in. Muriel is shown through the window following rules, and while Aziraphale looks, the layout allows that he is not visibly behind the window pane where Muriel was either before or after the look.

Aziraphale manages to keep not touching earthly objects, mainly focus on his dialogue, make sure his feet move when they should move, and his arms and hands don't do too much. The Metatron isn't visibly touching or holding any earthly objects either. Both of them leave the bookshop without the camera actually showing the exit through the doors.

Crowley is shown standing at the door to his car, having positioned himself for his incoming trick.

Aziraphale and the Metatron talk some more. Then there is a miracle sound and a notable reaction from Aziraphale. He chances a look over toward Crowley.

When Crowley is shown in the third of three camera shots leading to that moment, he has completed The Door Trick. That is the second of his three tricks to finish in the episode.

Aziraphale has a follow-up chained in from that Trick that I call The Door Catch. I do believe the story intended to communicate that name due to how pocket touches work. They involve word play. The story had an extensive memory on The Bullet Catch in episode 4, so put the ideas together, and there you go.

Inside the elevator, there is one zoomed in touch of presumably the Metatron's finger on the button that could be the story meaning it is an earthly object touch. It's hard to trust with all the known deception in the story itself and how the touch doesn't happen with both his face and body on camera as is usually done with a doorknob for other characters. Such a thing was even shown earlier at the bookshop. Even if perfectly valid, the touch stands out. What is he, human? After studying pocket touches, which have a heavy human presence, I grow all the more suspicious he could be.

The Metatron was not shown crossing the threshold of entering the elevator, but Aziraphale is. The doors are not shown to close, but the implication from the music and sound effects is that they did. Aziraphale has successfully managed to still not touch any earthly objects himself. He is also framed in a specific way all-around that is related to pocket touch mechanics. I at least know what to look for, and I can tell you that his right arm is lined up with the Metatron's in a way that is significant because there is a vertex illusionary touch between them.

A little past that part being done, Crowley does The Window Trick. That is his third and final trick of the three of this latter half of episode 6.

Three Threshold Tricks for this part of the episode makes sense because of how much this game likes the number 3.

Once Crowley has those short sideburns again, something resembling earthly object touches starts. His blurred hand is shown gripping the steering wheel. Then the camera and frame he's in decide to hide it. Texture fades in over where he might be touching the passenger seat. A tiny bit of the driver's seat behind him is partly shown. The camera, lighting, and credits keep messing with the view.

Aziraphale just keeps standing and eventually smiles in a way that's not really encouraging, for me, when I'm sympathizing with Crowley. Admittedly, I do think Crowley has a strategy in motion, especially after examining his overall threshold manipulation during the story.

Whew.

Okay, time to move on.

Let's wrap up with some notes and a list. There is a bonus at the end saved for posterity. That was me starting to grasp at the first Multiplicative Threshold Trick.

Some Notes:

Skin contact is significant, both on earthly objects and on a threshold itself. It seems to have more power from Crowley when he has longest-length sideburns. In particular, I'm referring to three memory access points with Gabriel and The Door Trick. In the door trick, the skin contact touch is the one given a Triple with a Triple multiplier.

Gabriel has some skin contact in at least one of those same memory access points. Otherwise, I haven't figured out much besides Shax's notable avoidance in the present day storyline.

Rules are broken, and the season 2 story continues...until they're broken with great deliberation by two experts...who might be each on their way to Heaven and Hell respectively.

The one with the imagery of the Hell threshold has plants behind him, so some of Earth is still there.

Earthly Objects List

This list includes objects that may have had implied touches instead of actual touches because checking who touched what when, then realizing it's blurry or just presumed, is exhausting when I just want a list. I'm not going to specify every different type of paper that might have been touched...but you know...paper was touched.

Barrel

Bell

Bench

Blanket

Candle

Car seat

Cardboard box

Cards

Cart

Chair

Clipboard

Clothing

Counter

Cup

Feather duster

Hat

Human

Goat

Keys

Magnifying glass

Mail

Mirror

Newspaper

Paper

Pencil

Phone

Piano

Plastic bag

Plastic container

Plate

Rag

Record

Rock

Rug

Scroll

Steering wheel

Table

Towel

Wheelchair

Window

Wine bottle

Wooden box

Bonus Round: Me Bragging on Crowley

The below is saved for posterity because I had so much fun with it. I am quite convinced that this part was the first Multiplicative Threshold Trick and almost a tutorial because the others don't come, or at least finish, until much later and are far more difficult to recognize.

Look, I obsess over David Tennant being Crowley because he is so beautifully perfect for the role, so I am definitely super biased in everything here.

Allow me to attempt demonstrating to you how mind-blowing Crowley is at this game. We're not going to know if what I think happened, really happened, because I don't understand the rules the way he does. Here is what I think happened: He did three threshold-only touches while entering the coffee shop in episode 1. What does that accomplish? Why would he do that? I don't know! My current guess is maybe three in a row actually gives next-level supernatural points in the game, largely in part because of the season’s ending, which is too much to cover here.

Am I sure? Absolutely not, especially with how blurs seem to work between characters and the more standard earthly object touches.

The car arrives, and Crowley places only part of his shoe on the edge of the sidewalk. The heel doesn't touch the street, and the front tip doesn't touch the sidewalk. The movement is quick, so it's a little blurred. Theoretical threshold-only touch #1.

The camera pans up, and then you see his fingers on the side panel of his door that just so happen to only get maybe the window frame and not the window itself. It's blurry, but that's the best I can do. I also have to check frame by frame because it's too fast otherwise. So, if the window is the earthly object but not its frame, then we're good. He's touching both the door frame and the window frame so that could be a 2-in-1 touch. Theoretical threshold-only touch #2.

He closes the door, steps forward, does a spin, and then walks toward the coffee shop. When he gets to that door, his hand should be above the lock, and maybe it's a blurry gray thing, but it's so hard to tell. It's blurry. He's moving too fast. Even if he is touching it, he is covering it completely with his hand.

Since he covers it up fully with his palm, does it somehow not count? If so, then you can tell that his fingers are on the door panel only while his thumb is on the indentation of that panel connected to the window. The tip of his thumb is barely touching the window. The credit for the touch goes to the door panel instead of the window because the door panel has three of five digits from one hand on it whereas the window only has that one little thumb tip. Three digits on one panel could be a 3-in-1 touch. Theoretical threshold-only touch #3.

On entry, there is a fourth threshold that has no door, it’s just separating one section of the coffee shop to another. He passes through, passes Aziraphale, and sits down.

For some reason, he saves his starting two points for the arm on the back of the chair and the question, "Right., what's the problem?" Added in is an implied skin contact touch to the table, seen two cuts later.

The music and the camera work is really impressive in the whole thing, in my opinion. The story wants us to see that sequence in that way. What a beautiful entrance.

He's playing this game in tandem with his sideburns scheme, and there, he is definitely using thresholds to his advantage.

[flatland-a-2024-translation]

Section 06. Of Recognition by Sight

[Table of Contents]

I’m about to seem very inconsistent.

In the previous sections I’ve told you that all things in Flatland appear to us to be nothing but a Straight Line; and it was implied that this makes it impossible to tell people or objects apart by looking at them.

But now I will be explaining to my Spaceland critics how we Flatlanders do recognize one another by our sense of Sight.

If you, the Reader, will take the time to revisit the paragraph where you think I claimed that Recognition by Feeling is universal, you will that I specified “among the lower classes”. Only among the higher classes in our civilized societies is Sight Recognition practiced.

That this skill can be practiced anywhere, for any class, is the result of the Fog that covers the land for most of the year in all parts of Flatland except in deserts. What Spacelanders see as a depressing, evil smog that blots out the landscape and makes you cold and sick, we celebrate and see as a blessing second only to air itself, and is recognized as the Nurse of art and the Parent of science.

But I’ll try to stop singing praise for this generous Element so that I can explain to you what I mean.

If Fog didn’t exist, all Lines would appear just as sharp and clear as every other Line, and this is actually the case in those unhappy desert countries where the atmosphere is perfectly dry and transparent.

But wherever Fog can be found, objects that are at a distance of, for example, three feet, are noticeably dimmer than those at a distance of two feet and eleven inches.

This means that by careful, constant observation, we are able to understand, with very high accuracy, the shape of the object we are looking at.

A specific example will let me make my meaning clear to you without needing many more paragraphs of explanation.

Imagine that I see two strangers approaching me, whose rank I want to learn. Let’s say that they are a Merchant, and a Physician, or in other words, an Equilateral Triangle, and a Pentagon – so how do I tell them apart?

Here is a diagram to illustrate:

[Image description start: A black and white illustration showing an equilateral triangle and a pentagon, with a drawing of an eye seen from the side pointed at each of them. The point facing the eye is labled A, the point below is B, and the point above is C. A thin line traces the peripheral vision of the eye, and a vertical rectangle in front of point A shows what the eye of the Flatlander can see: a straight line, in a gradient of white at the center, and darker at the edges. The triangle’s edges become darker faster than the pentagon’s. Image description end.]

It will immediately be obvious to every child in Spaceland who knows anything about Geometry that if I am facing these two men so that I am looking directly at their front point (A), my view, obviously, lies perfectly between the two points on either side of that (CA, AB), so that both points appear to be the same size.

Now when I look at the Equilateral Merchant, what will I see? I will see a straight line (in reality made up of three points), with the center of the line (which is really point A) being very bright (Because point A is closest to me).

The two seeming-ends of the line, though, will be much darker, with a very sudden shift from the white of the center to almost black. This is because the points (B and c) that make up the ends of this seeming-line are much further away from me, with more Fog covering them.

On the other hand, the line that represents the Pentagon Physician will shift from white to a lighter grey rather than almost black, because the points that make up the ends of the line are not as far away from me than they were on the Triangle.

((Note from the second editor: To simplify further: The closer the point is to you, the brighter it is. The further away, the darker it is. Just remember this, and you’ll be fine.))

The Reader will probably understand from this example how – after a very long course of training aided by constant practical experience – those of us who are well-educated can easily tell strangers apart when it comes to the Equilateral and Isosceles classes by our sense of sight.

If my Spaceland friends have grasped this idea enough that you’re not immediately rejecting it as impossible, I’ll consider my job done in this matter. If I tried to give you any more details, I’d only confuse you hopelessly.

But for the sake of the young and inexperienced, who might assume, from the two examples I gave above of how I would recognize my Father and one of my Sons, that Recognition by Sight is easy to learn, I feel the need to point out that, in reality, the problems posed by Sight Recognition are much more subtle and complex than my simple diagram can convey to those in Spaceland.

For example, if my Father, the Equilateral Triangle pictured above, were to approach me with one of his sides instead of his angle, then, until I’ve asked him to rotate, or until I move around him to another angle, I cannot be certain whether I am looking at my Father, the Equilateral Triangle, or a Straight Line, which in other words means a Woman.

Then, when I am with one of my two Hexagonal Grandsons, looking at one of his sides, it will be clear, I hope, from the diagram below, that I will see a straight line with a large center of brightness (made up by the points A and B), with two small darker sections above and below, which quickly fade away into dimness.

[Image description start: A black and white illustration showing a hexagon being looked at from the side, so that one of the flat sides, created by points A and B, is facing the eye, with points C and D above and below. The Flatlander's eye perceives a straight line with a large, white center, with the very top and bottom sections suddenly turning dark, and fading even darker at the ends. Image description end.]

But I need to resist the temptation to keep explaining about these topics.

Even the best mathematician in Spaceland should believe me when I tell you that when you are at a party or a convention, moving around the room and other people, trying to recognize and keep track of the many high-ranking Polygons around you is not an easy task.

This is why we value our expert mathematicians, Professors of both Static and Kinetic Geometry, from the University of Wentbridge, so highly. They are the ones who teach the elites of the states the complex art of Sight Recognition.

It is only a few of the most promising sons of our most noble and wealthy houses who can afford the time and money necessary for actually Mastering this noble and valuable Art.

If I, a Mathematician of fair skill, and the Grandfather of two very promising and perfectly regular Hexagons, find myself in the middle of a crowd of rotating Polygons of the higher classes, even I sometimes find myself unsure!

And of course, to a common Tradesman Equilateral or Slave Isosceles, such a sight must be as bewildering and meaningless as it would be to you, my dear Reader, if you were suddenly transported to our country.

In a crowd like this, the only thing you would see, wherever you look, is nothing but a Line that seems to be straight, but with different parts in constantly changing light or darkness.

Even if you had graduated from your third year in the University’s classes for Pentagons and Hexagons, and had memorized the theory of the subject, you would quickly find yourself realizing that it will take many years of practical experience before you could confidently move through a high-society crowd without bumping into your betters.

It is impolite in the extreme to ask to “Feel” such superior nobles, and it is without a doubt, due to their superior culture and breeding, that these fashionable crowds know everything of your shape and movements, while you, still inexperienced, know next to nothing about theirs.

In other words, the only way to truly belong in Polygonal society is to be a Polygon yourself. It’s a painful lesson I have had to learn the hard way.

It is astonishing how much the Art (I like call it an instinct) of Sight Recognition is honed simply by constant practice, while avoiding the custom of “Feeling”.

((Note from the second editor: I apologize in advance for the next sentence you are going to read after this interruption is done.

The author here, as you may be able to guess soon enough, thinks he knows more than he does.

I will state now, for the record, that his idea of how Deaf and nonverbal people learn to speak is completely and blatantly false, a myth long since thrown away, but I will still transcribe his words here for the sake of posterity, and to better help you understand his mindset.

Let me make it absolutely clear that denying Deaf, Nonverbal, and Semiverbal children access to sign language or Augmentive and Alternative Communication devices (AAC), and forcing them to lipread or spend years learning to speak perfectly aloud, does not help them learn to communicate better. The only thing it accomplishes is isolating and punishing them and delaying their ability to talk to you.

Let them learn sign language (and you can learn it alongside them!). Get them an AAC device. Stop trying to fit a square through a circular hole! It is a myth that sign language stops Deaf and mute people from speaking – just because you didn’t bother to learn doesn’t mean they’re not talking!

Interruption over now. You may continue.))

Just as with you, if the Deaf and Mute are allowed to gesticulate and to use sign language, will never acquire the more difficult, but far more valuable art of speech and lip-reading, so it is with us as regards "Seeing" and "Feeling".

No one who learns to "Feeling" early in their life will ever learn "Seeing" in perfection.

This is why “Feeling” is either discouraged. or forbidden completely among the families of our Higher Classes.

The children of High-Class Polygons are not sent to the common Public Elementary schools where Feeling is taught. Instead, they are sent to private schools with very strict entrance requirements.

At these schools, to “Feel” is seen as a serious problem, and is punished with Suspension for the first offense, and complete Expulsion for the second.

But the lower classes think of Sight Recognition as an unattainable luxury.

The common Equilateral Tradesman can’t afford to send even just one of his sons away to spend an entire third of his life studying abstract ideas.

So the children of the poor are allowed “feel” as soon as they begin moving, and in doing so become practiced at moving and interacting with others very quickly, which makes them seem, to the untrained eye, much better developed than the comparatively listless, unmoving attitude of young nobles Polygons of the same age.

But don’t let this disparity fool you – once the young Polygons have finally completed their course at the University, and are ready to go out into the world to gain more experience, a change sweeps over them so that they seem to be born for a second time.

In all the skills of art, science, and sociability, they then rapidly catch up to and out-compete their Triangular competitors with ease.

It is rare for any of the Polygonal Class to fail their Final Test at the University, but it does happen, promising a life of pitiable misery to these unsuccessful nobles. Cast out by other Polygons, they can make no friends among the common classes either.

They cannot function in Polygonal society because of their lack of Sight Recognition, but also have no idea how to navigate by Feel, as they’ve been forbidden and shamed out of learning it their whole lives.

There are no jobs they can perform, either professional or common, and though most Countries do not actually ban them from getting married, it is still difficult for them to find any willing partners, since history has shown us that the children of such marriages will be, at best, similarly unfit for the noble life, or, at worst, blatantly Irregular.

This trash of the Nobility is where many of the leaders of the various Tumults and Seditions of the past centuries have risen. So many, in fact, that an increasing number of our progressive Statesmen have decided that either imprisoning these wretched outcasts for life, or at least mercy killing them, would make life easier for everyone.

But I am once again becoming distracted by the subject of Irregularity, which is actually so important for you to understand that it deserves its own separate section.

[Table of Contents]

[greenboyfriend]

tarot deep dive with me: the hermit

the hermit is an interesting card not only because it's part of the major arcana, but also because its meaning has seen some discrepancies over the years. the image above is from the ryder-waite-smith deck, which depicts the hermit as someone who offers knowledge instead of seeking it out. he shows others the way and uses his lantern to clear the path. notice how he's holding it up- this represents the heights he's achieved in his life, as well as those that his students would like to earn.

before we talk more about waite's interpretations of the card, i want to go back to discuss older interpretations, as well.

if you know about the tarot's history, then you'll know that it originated as a playing card game (a trump card game, more specifically) southern italians would play. before tarot was used for divination, the hermit was more or less a symbol for the passing of time. often, he was depicted as a man who had achieved lots in life- as is evident by his nice clothing- but knows that his time is limited. in some decks, he was known as father time himself.

here he is in some nice robes, the blue one's even embroidered!!

another thing worth noting about the hermit is his association with saturn. saturn represents old age, hard work, and isolation. this includes people who receive little for their efforts, and melancholic types whose lives must be lived alone. already, associations with this card begin to blur.

what was once an hour glass turns into a lantern when the tarot hits france, and we begin to see more and more depictions of the hermit traveling. he is named "L'Ermite"* forever and always.

his association with time is lost in favor of showing us someone who lives in solitude, quietly searching for knowledge within himself. he abstains from the social scene or any kind of passion to continue his quest for wisdom.

as occultism spread in france, so did the hermit's interpretations. some were obsessed with the hermit representing the fourth virtue of prudence, since the other three- strength, justice, and temperance- were already found in the tarot. some argued that his thick cloak was used as a sort of membrane, to emphasize this virtue.

prudence is not seen as reservedness in this context, but instead as a means to differentiate between good and bad. honestly, it just reminds me a lot of the lovers and judgement; it is the ability to learn from your mistakes, make good choices in the present, and prepare for the future.

you can see that especially here, where the cloak's exterior is drab, but its interior flaunts a royal blue.

all of this leads us back to waite, who completely refuses these interpretations. he argues, instead, that the hermit is a teacher, providing his students light in their own paths. in this deck- which is at the very top of this post- he is standing on a mountain for the best visibility, lantern in hand.

like most things in life, we can do a lot with a little temperance. if we take all of these interpretations, we can greatly expand our expertise. much of the time, you see this anyway: the need to do a "social media detox" and separate yourself from the world to find the answers within, for example. within that story, your own intuition can play as your guide.

what i also find interesting is finding knowledge from within/without. in none of the examples does the hermit find wisdom from without, but when it comes to reading for someone, it can often be what the cards are nudging them to do. it's not always easy to differentiate between these meanings- to tell someone to seek outside guidance or to search within. this is why the other cards in the reading are so important, as well as and especially your own intuition as the reader. if your heart says yes, then it is, and if your gut says no, then its not. this is my own method, however. find what works best to tap into your own intuition!

before i conclude this ramble session, i wanted to do some examples of how the hermit could appear in a reading.

knowledge from without

for this example, i asked for cards that would imply that i would need to seek out knowledge, with the hermit present. i pulled the 4 of pentacles, the 8 of swords, and the ace of wands reversed. for this hypothetical person, you could assume that maybe they've looked inwards to excess, to the point of halting all change in favor of their "preferred" status quo. however, the 8 of swords tells us that they're not seeing the full picture, and if they were to strike out on a new path- as the ace of wands implies- they may find some help- the hermit.

knowledge from within

for this one, i asked the cards to show me a situation where i would need to search for answers from within. i pulled the 8 of swords, temperance, 10 of swords reversed, and the page of cups. oh, and the hermit of course. so, someone is feeling trapped; they can't see the full truth of their situation. they need to try something different! bring something new into the mix, maybe. the 10 of swords tells us that they've been feeling very down, perhaps because of people around them. the page of cups tells us that they must express their feelings, as to not get trampled. however, the hermit says that they should take a minute to reassess their situation before acting, and temperance furthers this by only dipping her toe in the water-- not doing too much too fast.

secret third thing

this one i just asked it to go ham. if you're reading this and it resonates with you, there's probably a reason why! anyway. i pulled the hermit, temperance, 8 of swords (back at it again), 2 of swords, the lovers, and the queen of pentacles.

this certainly seems like a "within" sort of situation. something is blocked because someone won't express their feelings, potentially in love but not necessarily. it could mean, more so, someone being challenged with their beliefs. this has the potential to change the balance of things, especially if no action is taken. this may have to be about how they treat others and themselves, have they been stingy with their time or emotions? it could be that, whoever you are, you're feeling trapped and isolated, but the solution is as easy as joining with others. trust in those around you and share with them what they have shared with you. maybe it will take a little soul searching to conjure up the exact solution, but know that it lies strongly with the queen of pentacles- being generous, kind, down to earth and resourceful.

anyway that's it. lmk if u enjoyed because i could do this forever tbh. yahoo special interest!! anyway have a great day.

*pardon the quotation marks there's just no way im going to go through the trouble of pasting les guillments, ok? french people will survive this

[bohemian-nights]

Even in the book it’s clear that the relationship between Rhaenyra and Daemon isn’t healthy (in fact you can make the argument that no romantic relationship depicted in any of George R.R. Martin’s work is completely healthy) and isn’t something anyone should strive for.

So when I first watched the show and saw the romantic twist they put on Rhaenyra and Daemon I was confused (as someone who read the book first HOTD is to me what the Percy Jackson movies are to that fandom, enjoyable but differing vastly from the source material) and not going to lie intrigued.

But then as the episodes went on I developed a very big love-hate relationship with Daemon. Episodes 6-7 pissed me off 🫠 Hooking up with anyone at the funeral of your wife isn’t cool (also Harwin who was Rhaenyra’s lover for ten years who she had three children with just died) I mean I get that everyone grieves in different ways but the fact that he slept with Rhaenyra especially when I know how he treated Laena (and his daughters to some extent) 🥴🙄

I would also like to say that I don’t play around with domestic violence (fictional and in the real world) so Daemon choking Rhaenyra really turned me off his character. It also felt like another moment in HOTD to showcase brutal violence against women.

There are a handful of potentially healthy romantic relationships(Rhaena and Garmund might have actually had a happy marriage), but yeah if someone is using Dumbnyra as an example of one 🫠

To me, the show never framed their relationship in a romantic context. I mean Rhaenyra is underage when we first meet her, she looks super young next to her overly grown uncle, and the necklace he gives her could constitute as grooming.

I think people got confused with the “switch up” because they are the only “shippable couple”(I say this term loosely because shippable to this fandom equals too white people who breathe near each other hence why we have the clusterf*ck that is lucemond) on the show so far. If the red flags didn’t ring for people in episode one they should’ve rung by episode four when he abandoned her in the brothel. People seemed to ignore this because she’s 18, but abandoning someone in a dangerous place they aren’t familiar with no matter their age is really scary

This is going to be a very controversial take(I’m not a person who gets off on seeing domestic violence), but it seems like the choking scene was necessary since people thought Dumbnyra was supposed to be a romantic couple 🤷🏽‍♀️

Daemon from day one was a crazy a**hole who hardly cared about anyone. He does have redeeming qualities in the book(notably how is with Laena and Nettles, which they better not screw over because Ryan Condal himself has said the man is a gray character and she’s his only light now), but so far they’ve cut those parts out and turned him into a man obsessed with his brother.

Rhaenyra, as are all the other women in his life, is a causality of his obsession. People wanted her to be his exception, but she was never framed in that way. In fact, she’s one of his first “victims.”

Daemon has not changed fundamentally since episode one. So it makes sense why he’d violently snap at her too. Out of all the violent scenes directed at women in the past season, the choking scene makes the most sense to me.

Like I said above, I hope we do see him change(and yes I’ll be biased and say I want him to change for Nettles like he did in the books) because he is supposed to be a morally gray character, but Rhaenyra is not part of the lighter side of him.

[heckosart]

Heya

Fellow (albeit novice) fantasy cartographer here

How'd you get into making maps for people?

Hi!

I've liked drawing and making maps for a long time, and I used to make up maps for fun as a kid. The things that inspired me originally were mostly books, I read fantasy extensively and I've always loved following the characters around by referring to the map as I read. From that I started to draw maps of places in books as well ones I made up. I drew a lot of magical islands for a while.

I also got really inspired by the natural forces of geology/plate tectonics/weather/etc and how they impact the land. I use all of that interest to try and create fantasy maps that have a sense of grounded believability to them. I'm by no means an expert, but I'm always learning and trying to improve.

Obviously for most maps I do professionally there's already a general shape and layout my clients have in mind, but even then I often include small additional islands, give borders and coastlines extra wiggle and variation, and look for ways to incorporate natural and geographic barriers that would help inform political ones.

As art of my thesis at art school, I made a map for a personal fantasy project. I also made a simpler map for a friend, and with those examples I put maps into my commission info. Since that time (2020) I've probably only done about five maps for clients, so I don't usually get as many as these last two jobs back to back might imply. It is always fun to work on though, and I'm thinking about doing some new personal pieces soon since it's been almost four years from the last time I did one for me.

My best recommendation for getting into map commissions would be to get a couple nice samples completed (at least one of a budget option and one big fancy one) and to decide on a clear plan for base pricing. Currently, I have maps broken down into two categories of price.

Simple: $90 - Includes lines, one flat color for land and one for water, mountains and rivers, and typed labels.

Complex: $180 - Includes lines, terrain color variation, symbols/terrain textures/landmark drawings/mountains/rivers, and handwritten labels.

I can also add on sea creatures and monsters and custom compass roses for an extra charge.

My pricing is based on knowing how long it takes me to do the work, how much effort it takes, and the expectation that short deadlines not be imposed. Extra complex requests and tight deadlines (for maps I'd consider anything less than three weeks to be tight) are fully welcome, but will come with an added price to account for those requirements. I would also charge far more for a commercial client, all of my prices here and in my commission info are for personal use jobs only.

You probably know this already, but I always have to say it! Make sure, whatever you're charging, you're making above minimum wage. Ideally, you should make more than minimum because custom art is luxury service. Your skills are valuable, so treat them like it!

I also can't recommend making a TOS to protect both you and your clients' safety enough. Mine are very much not perfect, but I'm always happy to offer them as something for other artists to reference or even just copy when making their own.

Personal Use | Commercial Use

On top of all of that, I'm very persistent with my self-promotion. I used to only use Twitter for art, but post-Elon I've branched back out to Tumblr and made a Bluesky because suddenly it was really scary to notice that all my eggs (clients and followers) were in that one volatile basket. I'm not famous or wildly successful, but my followings on here and Bluesky are still a tiny fraction of on Twitter and that's scary. I try to reblog/retweet/etc my promotional posts once a day to keep eyes on them (but I forget pretty often too lol) and whenever I have a little drawing or something I post it. I'm not the most prolific artist, but I try not to worry about that too much.

Hopefully this isn't too much stuff you already know and hopefully some of it was helpful!

[oddeyes588]

Do you think Shin Yoshida gets a lot of unjustified hate, especially from American Yu-Gi-Oh! fans, who accuse him of sexism? It seems like they’re always on the hunt to blame him for things, even when he’s not the only writer and not 100% responsible for a story not catering to them or their self-insert fantasies. Take Zexal, for example—he made it feel like headcanons mattered, but the show itself felt more like a self-insert Yu-Gi-Oh! series rather than a real product like the first three, which were the most well-written. My takes on Yu-Gi-Oh! aren’t like the fandom’s nonsense because I see myself as above all that drama.

First of all OP this is the most contentious ask I've ever received, because you're saying you're "above" all this drama while also sending me an anon ask about it AND even belittling the yugioh series that I consider to be the most solidly written, but I digress.

Secondly, in a sense, while the hate might not be 100% justified as there's always more than one person behind the wheel with these things, Shin Yoshida's works have generally seemed to have recurring trends in terms of where the writing falls short, so it's hard not to then look towards him, the person in charge of things. The treatment of female characters being one of the more notorious aspects, which admittedly has been a problem throughout the entirety of the franchise (see: Aki from 5ds), but reached something of a peak at around Zexal and Arc-V, which as we all know are the series he was in the most charge of.

Thirdly, I'm having a hard time understanding what you mean by "making it feel like headcanons mattered", because that would imply he took inspiration from headcanons created by fans during the time of Zexal's release, but when you consider how much time it takes to create a show and air said show, this doesn't really make sense? In general any take that implies that the show was influenced at all by the fans during their runtime is inherently incorrect because by the time a show starts airing, it's already too late for any further influence because the product is already finished and is now simply being aired. Fundamentally, Zexal is it's own thing, taking a step away from the linear timeline set by DM-GX-5ds, setting up it's own lore and world—not that they didn't still make the occasional reference here and there. It's as much of a "real product" as the first three, and I really wish you wouldn't come in here belittling them because for all their flaws, Zexal and Arc-V are my favorites. I consider Zexal to be the best written and Arc-V to be... well, the one with the most unused potential. I would think my NAME would make it clear where my preferences stand in terms of yugioh series, considering I decided to name myself after a CARD.

To bring it back to the main question here... I think that there's a lot we don't know about what goes on behind the scenes but Shin Yoshida's works tend to have recurring flaws that make it seem at least somewhat justified to aim the criticism in his direction when it comes to those.

[carolap53]

Decision Making TGIF Today God Is First Volume 1 by Os Hillman

02/07/2024

"Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding." - Proverbs 3:5 This is one of the most quoted verses in the Bible related to gaining wisdom and direction from God. Yet I have never heard one teaching on this passage that teaches what I believe the psalmist is really saying. The first part is pretty easy; we are to trust with all our heart. But the next part is not so clear. We are not to lean on our own understanding. If we are not to lean on our own understanding, on whose understanding are we to lean? God's! Throughout the Old Testament we find that God set up structures by which those in authority made decisions. God has always set a principle whereby we are to seek Him in all our decisions, that He might truly make our decisions. In the Old Testament, the priest made decisions based on which way the Urim and Thummim fell inside his breastplate. The casting of lots was another means of allowing a decision to be left with God. Proverbs says, "The lot is cast into the lap, but its every decision is from the Lord" (Prov. 16:33). Another means of making a decision was through the agreement of two or three. No one could be guilty of any crime without the witness of two or three. This was a biblical way of confirming a matter. Still another means of making a decision is through a multitude of counselors. Given all these scenarios, what are we to gain from these examples? We are told in Jeremiah 17:9a, "The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure." So what really protects each of us from the deceit of our own heart? I believe it is the combination of all the above. When we get to a place with God that our decisions are accountable to others, whether that be a wife, a board, or a few close friends who are committed to the same godly ideals, this is when we are protected from the deceit of our own heart. This is one of the hardest things to yield to God-the right to make our own decisions. Yet, it is the most elementary principle God requires of us to receive His blessing in our lives. This principle took a long time for me to appreciate. However, today I can tell you I would never make a major decision without the counsel of others who are close to me. Relational accountability has become lost in our culture due to our hunger for independence. I have experienced too often the hardship that results from making decisions that God isn't behind. Walking in obedience is the only real freedom in Christ.

[citrijp]

Day 3

I only thought of this today so uh. Sorry. :P I know it's not very satisfying to start on Day 3, but days 1 and 2 were just "Refresh on kana" and "Wait Precure kinda slaps" anyway. So. Uhhhh yeah. This is gonna be tucked under the cut bc it's LONG.

Kana Practice

95.8%. Not bad tbh but MAN I'm rusty as hell on katakana lmfao. My hiragana is fine but katakana has always been a bit of a struggle.

Grammar

First grammar lesson(s) baby let's GOOOOO

I'm gonna be honest y'all I was feeling a little cynical about this one bc grammar has always been a whole Thing for me. Like it just. Never made any fucking sense to me. It wasn't even hard per se but like は and が? What's up with those??

My answer actually came in the form of three Cure Dolly videos. And I learned a LOT from these three videos alone. Like. More than I thought because I knew some of the basics.

For example (keep in mind that this is three lessons in and does NOT account for all forms, only the most basic of basics):

There two types of sentences in this world: A is B and A does B.

There are three basic ways to break them down: ＡがＢだ。A is B (noun). 私がアメリカ人だ。; ＡがBい。A is B (-i adjective). ペンが赤いだ。; ＡがBう。A does B (-u verb). 私が食べる。If you're wondering where the polite form, です, is, Cure Dolly opted not to use this for now.

Logical particles can be omitted if the topic is already clear. In the above example, I say "I'm an American" by saying 私がアメリカ人だ。If we KNOW the topic is 私 then we can omit that and just say アメリカ人だ。This is kind of a "duh" that I already knew but it becomes a lot more important when we get to…

は。Hey, buddy! Where ya been??? As it turns out, this funky little non-logical guy has been why I didn't know the difference between it and が—they aren't the same and it's not about choosing between them. I feel like every website and its mother has an article about "choosing" between は and が lol, but it's not ABOUT choosing between them.

は is a topic marker. Again, "Yeah, duh, Lem", but like. No. You don't understand (unless you do lol). In the sentence 私はアメリカ人。, the は is not the "I am" in the sentence. It's more like this:

私は［私が］アメリカ人だ。

As for me, [I'm] an American.

And there, the invisible が—a.k.a. the zero pronoun—makes an appearance. This shit BLEW MY GODDAMN MIND.

A better example came when I was learning を and に actually. I'm gonna use one of my friends' names in this example but the basis of the sentence comes from Cure Dolly.

私がボールをモリーに投げる。

I throw the ball to Molly.

This sentence has a subject (私 marked by が), an object (ボール marked by を), a destination (モリー marked by に) and a verb (投げる marked by its existence as a verb idk).

If you change any of the logical particles and their respective nouns, the sentence fundamentally changes.

モリーがボールを私に投げる。

Molly throws the ball to me.

ボールが私をモリーに投げる。

The ball throws me to Molly (zoinks).

Logical particle usage makes a big difference, as you can see, lol. This might be another "duh" moment but it helped me understand the purpose of は in this example.

If you use は, you can omit either 私が, ボールを, or モリーに so long as you use the noun as a topic marker. For example:

私はボールをモリーに投げる。

As for me, [I] throw the ball to Molly.

(Omitted: 私が)

An even better example is when you can equate the omitted particle to a pronoun:

ボールは私がモリーに投げる。

As for the ball, I throw [it] to Molly.

(Omitted: ボールを)

モリーは私がボールを投げる。

As for Molly, I throw the ball [to them].

(Omitted: モリーに)

If you put 「私がボールをモリーに投げる。」、「私はボールをモリーに投げる。」、「ボールは私がモリーに投げる。」、and 「モリーは私がボールを投げる。」 into a Google Translate, they all mean the same thing: I throw the ball to Molly. This is because unlike changing what nouns are in front of logical particles, as long as you have the remaining logical particles right, what you use as a topic marker DOESN'T MATTER.

PHEW sorry that wasn't supposed to be that long but I really enjoyed learning this. This also isn't meant to be informational because it's not laid out that well but I'll tag it anyway. 😅 But Cure Dolly explains it much better. The playlist is linked on my pinned post but if you want to just get to it now, it's here (my reference is the first three lessons).

Okay now that I've infodumped about Japanese grammar. Uhhhh

Active Immersion

Precure! I uhhh tripped and fell and watched more episodes yesterday but I guess that saves me some time and I only have to watch my 1~4 episodes WITHOUT subtitles. I'm starting to pick up on words—mainly, やる気 is sticking, and I wanna learn what ヤナレーダ (using katakana because that's what's used for the monsters themselves) comes from. Probably something related to procrastination considering the Witch of Delays. If I'm right about that I'm gonna be so proud of myself lol

Conclusion

Overall, I'm having a lot of fun so far. I really like this style of learning, and it fits into my schedule SO much better than textbooks and such. Plus I feel like I'm actually getting it naturally and not just stuffing a bunch of info in my brain even though still kind of am?? Idk it's neat

[itslottiehere]

hello

this is the kind of question i get when i say i’m not american / british / come from a non-english speaking country.

not trying to be rude or anything like that, please just to make it clear !! but i think north american / british people / anyone from countries who were born speaking english should be more open minded in this regard. it’s not because a person was born in a country that doesn’t have english as the first language, that they couldn’t learn english.

if they stop to think about it, they were shocked at how many non-english speaking people there are in the world.

know it seems like i’m always complaining about something like that, but i swear it’s not like that !!! think it’s because i spent almost half of my entire adolescence and a little bit of my adult life now listening to things like that (but much more mean) and i was always silent for fear of people judging me even more, so i think it’s only now i am “expressing myself” with this situation.

i don’t know, just ignore all that above, i have very important news:

i adOPTED A DOG !!!!!! and he is the love of my life now !!!!!!! i love him so much !!!!!!

i don’t think i’ve ever been so happy in my life !!!

i’m all soft and teary today because of him 😭😭😭😭😭😭💓💓💓💓💓💓💓💓❕️❕️❕️❕️❕️❕️

i love you 🫶🏻

MY DARLING I LOVE YOU ANON!! you’re absolutely not rude! not at all, your feelings are very much valid and you deserve to let them be known!

i totally get your point, i don’t think i’ve ever personally encountered those people (luckily) but i see your point!

honestly, most of the times i think it’s because english speaking countries don’t really learn a second language (i’m not saying no one does, i’m saying that most of the times the fact that they already speak the international language doesn’t make them/the education system very keen on teaching a second language), as other countries do! in italy for example we take a second language from middle school, for three years!

AND OH MY GOD A DOG ???????? ARE YOU KIDDING ME, WHAT’S HIS NAME WHAT KIND OF DOG IS HE HOW OLD IS HE I NEED TO KNOW !!!!

i love you!!!! 🤍

[accidental-memory]

So okay I teach math for a living.

You can only add two things that are of the same type. For example, you cannot add apples and oranges unless you convert their types to something they have in common, which in this case would be that they are both "fruit."

A fraction represents parts of some idealized whole -- called a "unit." So if you think of one apple that represents the ideal size of every apple, then that is your "unit" apple, and a fraction of an apple represents a portion of that apple.

Each of these fractions represent a portion of a thing. Think of 1/3 as being "a third of an apple" and 2/4 being "two fourths of an apple." So, good, we have the same unit.

But actually, we DON'T have the same unit. Because while we are adding parts of that apple together, we aren't adding equal-sized parts of that apple together! The unit of the first fraction is "thirds of an apple," and the unit of the second fraction is "fourths of an apple." These are different!

But the thing about "thirds" and "fourths" are that they are units that are created by cutting apart some idealized whole. This means they can be converted to something common -- just like converting apples and oranges to fruit.

The bottom number of a fraction is called a "denominator." Like the word "denomination" that we use to mean "a pre-set amount of stuff" (like a $20 bill is a pre-set allotment of twenty dollars, thus it's a denomination of money), it's setting up how much each "one" of a thing is actually worth. 1/3 is literally ONE "THIRD OF AN APPLE."

The clever way you get through this in mathematics is by simply deciding to cut up your fraction into smaller parts so that the individual parts are the same size. But for reasons that will only become clear later (I PROMISE I'LL EXPLAIN), we can only do this with multiplication.

So for the same reason that 2/4 is the same as 1/2, it's also the same as… 6/12. And 1/3 is the same as 4/12. So that would mean 1/3 + 2/4 = 4/12 + 6/12 = 10/12. Since both 10 and 12 can be divided by the same number (2), we can reduce this fraction from 10/12 to 5/6.

So you have your answer. But also, there's a clever visual guide for figuring this out. Check it:

So, remember how I said I would explain why we can "only do this with multiplication" when finding the common denominator? Notice what happened with the splits. In the left side number, I split it into three pieces. Then EACH of those three pieces was split into four. THREE split FOUR TIMES. Literally 3 times 4.

Now, nothing actually stops us from removing the splits we've put in these numbers as long as we remove all the splits that were made in one direction. So if you want to remove a vertical split, you have to remove all the vertical splits, etc.

Furthermore, nothing actually stops you from taking the pieces of number and rearranging them into a different shape (though rectangles are still the most useful). So, let's look at the answer we get when we add those two numbers: 10/12.

When we multiply fractions together, we just multiply straight across. For example, 2/5 * 3/7 = 6/35 cuz the numerators 2 and 3 multiply, and the denominators 5 and 7 multiply. 6 cames from 2 * 3, and 35 came from 5 * 7, so 6/35 is actually 2 * 3 / 5 * 7.

So, mathematically, what we just did with the rearrangement is: we said that 10 = 2 * 5 the same way that 12 = 2 * 6. This means that 10/12 is actually 2 * 5 / 2 * 6.

Working backwards from the little fraction multiplication lesson above, we can see that multiplying numerators and denominators is the same as multiplying two fractions, so 2 * 5 / 2 * 6 is the same as 2/2 * 5/6.

And 2/2 is just 1, and multiplying by 1 doesn't actually do anything. So 2/2 * 5/6 = 1 * 5/6 = 5/6.

I could also get into how to make all of this easier and faster with factoring and cancellation and the Funny Little Rune Trick for adding two fractions…

<3

Not me looking at this and realizing I've forgotten fucking everything I ever knew about math