#i think we interpret him similarly

[abyssalzones]

can you tell us about your interpretation of the better world universe!!!! especially curious how stan/mystery trio works into it

hell yesssss I definitely can. ABW is maybe my favorite niche gf thing and probably the only "AU" I care about but that may be due to the fact that it's an AU that exists in the canon and we know so little about it. so it has an established foundation that you're left to fill in the details with yourself... it's like a poke bowl to me. you can put anything in there

and since I felt like it here's a bonus pic of them living their best lives pestering ford

[explanation-y stuff under ze cut because I got very longwinded]

as for specifics of how I see everything working out, there's a few key points that establish why things happened differently from canon, the most important being:

Stan agrees to hide journal #3 somewhere

Ford reunites with fiddleford and they begin working together again

both of these are already confirmed in canon, the first being the most obvious "schism" between timelines. literally everything in ABW is the way it is because stan made a different decision. kind of crazy in terms of its implications: I feel like that moment in the basement is a really good example of how stan gets so few opportunities to shape her own life (while ford is in the picture...) because of her role as the 'black sheep' twin. it's not exactly a premeditated decision to push ford into the portal, it's her acting on feelings that have been bubbling unaddressed under the surface for 10-something years at that point, and only then does she have any sort of power over the "narrative" of both her life and the story itself, something that from her pov has been ford's story. and in the canon timeline, she says no.

so like, what the hell made her say yes in ABW's timeline? this question kind of haunts me because I feel like it has to be entirely dependent on what the inside of stan's head looked like at the time. it's possible something influenced her, but overall I think it's more interesting if ford did and said all the exact same things up until this point and it really was entirely dependent on stan's decision internally.

so stan says yes, goes on a big trip to the other side of the world somehow, and buries journal 3 somewhere probably never to be found again. yay! but, uh, going on a trip like ford was suggesting would... take weeks. that would leave ford alone again. and not to have my established thoughts informed by new material or anything but bill did give him 72 hours.

so, next order of business: how in the fuck would ford convince fiddleford to rejoin him??? I'm unsure between journal 3 and tbob's information how ford may have tried to reach out to him but it seems like fiddleford was pretty adamant about staying away from that guy, out of guilt or fear of bill/the portal or both. I don't think logically it would just be a matter of ford calling him enough times or finding out where he lives- and I think that's kind of getting away from the point of why ABW is the way it is too. if stan is suddenly making decisions that are influencing ford's life, I think it would be similarly interesting if fiddleford also possessed some unique autonomy in this scenario.

aka I think ford got fucked up badly (possibly involving losing an eye) and fiddleford found him half-dead while trying to burn his house down. [mabel voice] romance!

to clarify: I don't think fiddleford is obligated to take care of ford. a major part of him leaving the project was finally making the decision to leave a situation that was hurting him, that he'd been staying in entirely because he still cared about ford and felt on some level he could still help him (which gets broken with "I don't need you!") and I think that's a very reasonable decision on his part. but I also do have to think about all the times ford has been "the hero" in situations where fiddleford ends up hurt and helpless because of something traumatizing. I think it'd be fascinating to see that reversed and have fiddleford actively making the difficult, messy decision to take care of that guy even when they're on miserable terms. and so begins like a solid week of these two desperately trying to look out for eachother in a nightmare scenario where one of them probably needs to go to a hospital + keeps getting possessed off and on and the other is going through the worst addiction/withdrawal cycle of his life irt the memory gun. yay! (part of the reason this even works To Me also is heavily informed by the lack of secrets: if fiddleford is actively dressing that guy's wounds he can't really keep it all to himself anymore. crushingly intimate perhaps...)

stan gets back eventually. such is the context of this pic

from there it's a nebulous grab-bag of things I think could happen up to the foundation of the institute.

how do all three of these incredibly fucked up individuals get along? well they don't but then they do.

how do they get bill out of ford's head without performing amateur brain surgery? idk. my best guess is a fiddleford and stan bonding trip into ford's mindscape that potentially helps answer the first question. possibly utilizing the memory gun. shrugs.

what's up with that one picture you drew of parallel fidds holding the memory gun up to ford's head? well. okay that one might or might not be something that actually happened but the idea was just that ford is coping badly with a few specific things and I liked the idea of fiddleford "holding onto" something for him to remember and work through later when he's ready to deal with it, it's an interesting reversal of how he's normally more of a memory sink.

from the point in canon about them stabilizing the portal so that bill can't use it to get into their dimension anymore onward, I think it just becomes a matter of them living the lives they could've always had in canon without realizing it. hence "a better world." some cool tidbits I like to think about:

stan gets to transition much earlier (late 1990's perhaps?) and probably starts going by "lee" instead

she's also the institute's CMO and is mostly in it for going on business trips abroad with ford. and the money. obviously.

the institute probably also legitimately changes the world on a sociopolitical scale outside of just interdimensional travel since their research renders them uniquely untouchable and all three of them are trans (I'm cartoon logic-ing a little bit here just let me have this one)

ford is the eccentric bill nye esque face of the company, fiddleford is the backbone. that isn't to say ford doesn't do anything as I think he'd always moreso be in it for the science than the fame (though it is nice to be more than comfortable financially) but it's an open secret fiddleford keeps tabs on literally everything, he's still very security-oriented.

the northwest family now has a more prominent ongoing rivalry with the pines family that could be very funny to think about. they've taken all the LOGGING JOBS with their damn SCIENCE

part of the reason I thought ford should lose an eye is because I think having him wear an eyepatch would be a neat way to parallel stan's "role" as mr. mystery visually! stan wears an eyepatch for no legitimate reason to keep up appearances as a schlocky tourist trap host, but it also alludes to her being more than she seems under the surface. ford's eyepatch does sort of have a legitimate reason to exist, but he also could just wear his glass eye and it would probably be less "conspicuous." he chooses the eyepatch instead because it's part of his image as Stanford Pines, Founder of Oddology, and because it keeps him safe. there's also a little residual scarring there from damage to his eyelid/tarsal plate which could easily represent him hiding the more "damaged" aspects of himself under his successes. ouch.

I'm unsure if ford and stan would ever feel comfortable getting back in touch with their parents. I know a lot of people go that route with fan material but I don't think they should have to. I think they're much happier now having healed the rift between them on their own and getting to live successful lives for themselves, rather than to prove something to their father.

that being said I do think fiddleford gets in touch with emma-may and his son again and they end up on better terms with time and a Lot of effort. tate's family is now composed of his father, mother, "uncle" ford (in the ye olde gay closeted sense of referring to your dad's partner as an uncle), and auntie lee, and I like to think they go out on trips to the lake together often :]

also ford and fiddleford tie the knot unofficially (in the eyes of the government anyway) in 1990. owed to stan somehow getting "ordained" as a rabbi. don't ask me how.

the pines twins start visiting the institute from a younger age than they do irt visiting stan in the show-- but they're only permitted to come along on heavily-supervised interdimensional excursions once they turn 12. cue antics!

anyway, hopefully this extremely longwinded and loosely structured mess helped answer your question. I like ABW sooo so so much you guys

[jonnywaistcoat]

Hi Jonny, if you don't mind I have a question about the TMA TTRPG! So I noticed that on the player's guide there's this guy, who my friends and I assumed is probably Jon. If it is him, is this a canon design, or more like some of the non-canon stuff that's in the merch?

So, I hope you don't mind if i use this ask to go a bit off on one. I'm not specifically dragging you (I'm actualy glad you asked, as I've thinking about posting on the topic), but all the discussion around the RPG art and how "official" or "canon" it might be is, to my mind, slightly silly.

First up, is it "official" art? I mean, yeah, its art for the officially licenced Magnus Archives RPG. This means Monte Cook Games have commissioned someone to do a beatiful illustration broadly based on some aspect, episode or character from the podcast and it goes in the book. But that's kinda all it means. "Official" is a legal distinction, not an artistic one. The fact that it's in an official product doesn't make it any less one artist's cool interpretation of a character that has only been vaguely described in audio.

Second, is it Jonathan Sims the Archivist? I mean, it's probably based on the idea of him, but it's certainly not set in stone. When we were first discussing art with MCG, we advised that character pictures be more vibes-based and not explicitly tied to specific people (ie. a portrait inspired by Tim wouldn't be captioned "This is Tim" and wouldn't be placed opposite a profile for Tim Stoker, archival assistant.) This was mainly because we wanted the artists to have plenty of freedom to interpret and not feel too tied down by the need to know everything about the podcast. But, to be frank, it was also because we know that there are a few fans out there that are kinda Not Chill about what they've personally decided these characters look like and can get a bit defensive over depictions that differ.

It strikes me as particularly strange to be having this discussion about art that's for a roleplying game book. Something that's explicitly and solely designed to give you the ability to play in your version of the Magnus universe. The idea that this is the thing where we'd for some reason try to immutably establish unchangable appearances for these characters would be pretty funny if some folks weren't taking it so seriously. Similarly ridiculous is the idea we could reasonably have said to MCG "We'd love for you to make a huge beautiful RPG book of our setting... Just make sure you don't depict any of the iconic characters or events from it!"

But... is it "canon"? Now, to my mind, this highlights a real weakness in a lot of fandom thinking around "canon", which is that it generally has no idea what to do with adaptations. All adaptation is interpretation, and relies on taking a work and letting new creatives (and sometimes the same ones) have a different take on it. Are the appearances of the Fellowship of the Ring in the LOTR movies "canon"? How much, if at all, does that matter? Neil Gaiman's book Neverwhere was originaly a 90s BBC series made with a budget of 50 pence; is anyone who makes fanart of Mr Croup that doesn't look like the actor Hywel Bennet breaking canon? What about the novel that describes the character differently? Or the officially licenced Neverwhere comic where he looks like neither of them? Which is his "canon appearance"?

Canon is an inherently messy concept, and while it is useful for a creative team trying to keep continuity and consistency within a creative work, for thinking about anything beyond that it tends to be more hinderance than help.

Anyway, all this is to say that the above picture and all the others in the RPG are exactly as canon as every other picture you've ever seen of the Archivist.

[girlbeyondthegrave]

The Parallels Between Astrid and Lydia and What They Say About Beetlebabes: A Metaphorical Interpretation of the Final Dream Sequence

I previously made a post where I wrote about my interpretation of the dream sequence being inspired by Lydia and Astrid’s literal futures following the film, but after reading @theblacklistforever97 ‘s metaphorical interpretation of the final scene, I wanted to explore what messages Burton may be trying to convey. I think that we can find a strong message when we look at how Astrid’s time in the film parallels her mother’s experiences as a teenager.

The main takeaway from the linked post is that dream sequences often reveal the inner desires of characters, but I think that the parallels between mother and daughter can, too.

As teenagers, both characters are strange and unusual in their own rights. Lydia is iconically goth and melancholy with fascinations with death and photography, while Astrid reads classic Russian literature and wears edgy clothing. Both are shown to not fit in with people that are considered “normal.” Yet they want to feel embraced and have someone truly see them.

Lydia’s family writes her off as weird, and when she starts to bond with the Maitlands, they vanish for three months. She feels used after the incident at dinner.

As soon as Beetlejuice looks at her, he’s interested. His full attention is on her. He says she looked like someone he can relate to, and when Lydia basically says she wants to die, he’s genuinely taken aback. He doesn’t have to offer to talk about that with her, but he does. Beetlejuice genuinely values Lydia’s life, and he wants her to live it. There’s also no mention of marriage during that first encounter. He just wants Lydia to let him out—no mentions of being out permanently either.

But in their next encounter, Beetlejuice wants out for good, and he chooses Lydia to be tethered to in marriage. He’s downright gleeful when she talks to him again. It’s entirely possible that Beetlejuice only wanted to be out permanently after he met Lydia, and he’s enamored with her. We know now that he’s gone 600 years without romantic love, and that reframes his eagerness to marry her. He’s been carrying that ring around for hundreds of years, and he finally found someone he thinks is worthy of having it.

People could argue that Beetlejuice was using Lydia and had no real romantic interest in her, but after the sequel, there’s no denying that he has sincere feelings for Lydia. I detail a lot of his and Lydia’s moments in a separate post, but TLDR: Beetlejuice calls Lydia the love of his life and waits for her. He absolutely adores this woman, and he just wants to be with her.

Astrid’s relationship with Jeremy serves as a foil to Lydia and Beetlejuice’s. Jeremy feigns interest in Astrid to manipulate her into trusting him. He values her life only in the sense that he wants to take it for himself. He appeals to her desire for someone to understand her, but it’s not genuine. He lies about the incantation and uses Astrid’s desire for closure regarding her father to get what he wants. He had no intentions of being with Astrid; just using her for his own gain.

There’s only one man who behaves similarly to Jeremy in the film, and it’s not Beetlejuice—it’s Rory. While Jeremy wants to literally take control of Astrid’s life, Rory figuratively controls Lydia’s. He guilts her, he manipulates her, and Lydia has lost a lot of the spunk and fire she had as a teenager. Rory appeals to her emotions just like Jeremy does with Astrid so he can reach his own goals. He doesn’t believe in Lydia, doesn’t listen to her. It’s all an act to get to her money, just like Jeremy pretends to be the caring living boy to get Astrid to sign her life away.

If we look at the dream sequence metaphorically, the parallels between Astrid and Lydia make a solid case that Astrid is meant to reflect Lydia’s inner desires. Dream Astrid meets someone that matches her eccentric energy, who truly sees her, and they get to live happily ever after. Let’s also note that the boy is wearing a vampire costume, a monster that’s known for invoking fear, yet that’s the moment that captivates Dream Astrid. And even when a monstrous BabyJuice pops out of her, she smiles and accepts him as her own.

Beetlejuice sends a clear message here: if Lydia wants to feel fully seen and appreciated, she needs to find someone that matches her energy. He wants to be that someone, and he’s proven that his affections are far more genuine than Rory’s. He’s already accepted her, but she needs to accept him, too. He truly believes that if she can accept the connection they have, he will make her happy.

[toaskello]

Today seems like a good day to ramble about my favorite bit of imagery in all of Bionicle, and that would be the twin eclipse in Legends of Metru Nui.

To start, let's recap a bit. Our protagonists, the Matoran and friends, live on a tropical island. The deity they worship is the Great Spirit Mata Nui, a vague, godlike figure cast into unending slumber by his jealous brother. We never see this entity, although he is often represented with symbols like the Kanohi Hau or a rock with etched details representing an abstraction of that mask. Similarly, we never see him do anything, as he is sleeping. All we know is that the village elders say he was benevolent and good.

The first major plot twist in Bionicle comes when the Matoran travel underground and find their original home: a large cavernous dome with an island city surrounded by a vast silver sea. Despite being underground, twin suns are visible in the sky, frozen in a partial eclipse.

The next year of Bionicle is a flashback, taking place on this island city while Mata Nui is awake and the suns are shining bright. Mata Nui himself and his actions are still seemingly nowhere to be seen.

Tragedy strikes at the end of the year when Mata Nui's jealous brother infects him with a virus and sends him into his slumber while the twin suns eclipse. With the limited information about the true nature of Mata Nui we had in 2004, this always seemed to be a rather on-the-nose metaphor. The Great Spirit who watches over the Matoran falls asleep and the suns overhead eclipse in a manner that makes them look like closing eyes. He can no longer protect the Matoran from the eternal shadow like he once did.

Fast forward four years and the big reveal that all of Bionicle had been building up to is finally made known. The Great Spirit Mata Nui was a metallic colossus in which the Matoran resided. The island city was his brain, the silver sea his cerebrospinal fluid, the dome his skull. The suns, as it so happens, actually are his eyes. But importantly, the eyes are not looking down on the Matoran - they are looking up, away from them.

Mata Nui, as it so happens, was rather unconcerned with the inner workings of his body. He wasn't malicious, but he cared about his people as much as you and i care about our sesamoid bones. Do you know how many you have and where? Probably not. His major character arc going forward is recognizing this and, after being humbled into a puny (7-foot-tall) humanoid, learning to care and respect other beings, even those he would usually consider beneath him.

The reason I love this shot so much is that it works perfectly for both views of Mata Nui: the Matoran interpretation of an idyllic protector who banishes shadows from his place in the heavens, and the giant robot with people in his brain who is preoccupied with observing space. The perception of this scene changes as our understanding of both the biology and personality of Mata Nui are revealed throughout the story.

Like, they made a movie for a toy with this shot that you would have to go back and watch four years later to fully appreciate. And IDK, I think it's pretty cool.

[sammys-magical-au]

Night Furies & aging - a theory on the changes in Toothless’ design and behaviours

[I definitely didn’t accidentally delete this post the first time I tried making it and scream silently for five minutes]

Ok so strap in y’all, cuz this’ll probably be a long one, but I have some ideas as to why Toothless looks and acts so differently between the first and third films, since it’s something I’ve noticed a lot of people in the fandom talking about (especially recently with the announcement of the unnecessary live-action remake), and while a lot of the criticisms are totally valid (and this post is not meant to argue against those criticisms), I do have an alternate theory/headcanon about the changes we see in Toothless’ design and personality that I like a lot better than just thinking it’s the design team purposely fucking up a really good character to make him more appealing to children (even though that’s definitely what it is, again, I’m not saying that interpretation is wrong, this one is just more fun bc I get to ramble about biology and such 👌)

Y’all with me so far? Good. Let’s dive in, shall we?

Basically, my theory revolves around the fact that Toothless is a lot younger in the first movie than we may have thought. This is even kinda backed up in the second movie, because Valka points out that Hiccup and Toothless are the same age - so, that being considered, it’s likely that humans and dragons age similarly and have similar lifespans, and therefore in the first movie, considering how young Hiccup was, it’s not far out of the realm of possibility that Toothless was a juvenile dragon at this point in the timeline. He was practically a baby.

If that’s true, then that could be a very good explanation for the changes in both his physical appearance and his behaviours. His looks changed simply because he was still growing and developing at the time of the first movie, and his physical appearance changed along with Hiccup’s, meaning they quite literally grew up together between the first and third films. His habits and behaviours on the other hand would have changed due to social influences, and growing up surrounded by humans rather than his own kind.

I’ll expand more on both of these throughout the post, but I’m gonna start with comparisons of his design changes, specifically the ones I’ve seen pointed out the most often.

___

Physical design aspects:

1 - head shape

One of the biggest talking points when it comes to Toothless’ design changes, and also one of the most notable differences, is the shape of his face - specifically from the profile view.

The shape of his head differs a lot between the first and third movies, with his brow becoming much more prominent and the slope of his nose becoming steeper. When images of his profile from the first, second, and third movies are put side by side, however, it becomes a bit more clear how this progression could indicate aging and change in skull shape/structure

For a real-world example, here’s a comparison between a tiger cub and an adult tiger from the same angle:

As you can see, there are a lot of similarities here. An adult tiger’s brow also becomes more prominent, while the head becomes a bit bulkier and more square-shaped rather than thin and rectangular. The angles of the face are also much sharper.

When put side by side, the similarities are a bit more clear, and the changes in Toothless’ design start to look a lot more like the development of a big cat from cub to adult.

2 - scale pattern

Another change that gets brought up a lot is the fact that Toothless’ scale patterns disappear soon after the first movie.

In reality, if you look closely, the patterns are still there, but they’ve faded. You can see it better on his wings:

He definitely still has spots, but they’re much less visible.

This could possibly be a form of camouflage for young night furies - similarly to how a black jaguar’s spots become less visible as they grow

With the adult jaguar, the spots are still visible, but you have to look a little harder to see them - same with adult vs juvenile Toothless

Again, the similarities to big cats are pretty noticeable when compared side-by-side.

Additionally, although we sadly don’t get a really good look at the glowy effect the Hidden World has on Toothless’ scales in the movie, from what I can see, it definitely looks like the glow makes his scale patterns a lot more visible

3 - bulkiness

The third main difference I see pointed out is the fact that Toothless bulked up a lot between the first and third movies, and that one also has a simple possibile explanation - lots of young animals bulk up as they grow, because of muscle growth!

It’s very reasonable to assume that Toothless got bulkier bc he was young in the first movie, and over time (especially considering the amount of flying and fighting he did) he developed more muscle.

Compared to a lot of large mammals, the similarities in development are once again pretty evident. And I hear what you’re saying - Toothless is a dragon, a reptile, not a mammal, but the truth of the matter is, Toothless’ design *was* heavily based on large mammals, specifically cats, so comparing him to large cats and other mammals isn’t that much of a stretch, especially when you bring into consideration that an animal of this size might develop a little differently than real-life, modern reptiles.

Now, the night lights do sort of put a wrench in this theory, specifically the scale pattern part, and especially Dart and Ruffrunner, since they have more resemblance to Toothless but don’t share his scale pattern from the first movie - and I’m willing to admit that. That being said, it would be interesting to see a night light design with similar looks to Toothless in the first movie, specifically with the scale patterns. I’ll definitely chuck that in the to-draw folder for now, bc it’s fun to explore dragon biology through my own personal takes.

___

Behavioural changes:

Now onto the second part of this already-too-long post, the changes in Toothless’ behaviour throughout the films.

In the first movie, Toothless tends to act very catlike, whereas in the second and third movies, he acts more like a dog or even a person at times. I think this could be because, if he was a juvenile when he and Hiccup met, he learned more human behaviours than the behaviours of his own kind, almost being hand-raised in a sense, since he was so young.

The light fury’s (or “Ivory”, as I tend to call her just for funsies) behaviours also showcase this, since she grew up in the wild and surrounded by her own kind (as we see at least three other light furies besides her in the Hidden World), and behaves a lot like Toothless did in the first movie, before being trained. If Toothless hadn’t had any human interaction, it’s very likely that he’d act similarly to Ivory and the way he did in the first movie.

Additionally, the reason behind his awkward behaviour around Ivory is because he doesn’t know how to act or what body language to use around another fury, as he didn’t learn. Everything he’s learned about social interactions came more from humans - which can often be seen with wild animals raised by people, their behaviour is often different from that of animals that grew up in their natural environments. This isn’t to say that I think Toothless being raised by humans is wrong - it was his only way of survival, and the relationship he has with humans is much closer to that of an animal with a wildlife conservationist rather than that of an exotic “pet” influencer on tik tok. However, having to grow up without other night furies definitely affected his social development with other furies, since he didn’t have the chance to interact with another dragon like him until he was a full-grown adult.

(This also connects to my headcanon that night/light furies live in familial groups similar to lion prides, and young dragons often stay with this group until they’re ready to find a mate and start a pride of their own. Toothless likely got separated from his pride too early, either by getting lost somehow or, since he’s said to be the last of his kind, they were all killed - either way, he wasn’t ready to leave them yet, which might also explain his heightened aggression at the beginning of the first movie, since he’s not only a wild animal but he’s also terrified and too young to be on his own.)

If you made it this far, congratulations! You’re more patient than me!! And thanks for letting me ramble about this!!!

TL:DR - Toothless was a juvenile/very young dragon in the first movie, and the changes in his appearance and behaviour stem from both his natural aging process and the fact that he was separated from his kind at a very young age and grew up with humans.

[prince-liest]

Saw a post recently that rhetorically asked why authors and show writers leaving character sexuality up to interpretation is disappointing when fifteen years ago getting a statement that things were up to interpretation (as opposed to "Definitely NOT gay, you freaks!") was a blessing, and I make a point of never discoursing on the bird app, but wanted to share some thoughts on the subject here - particularly because Alastor is kind of a hot topic on this subject and I think he actually makes for a great example for my thoughts on this.

Honestly, as someone who did live through the "if you think my characters are gay then you're stupid and should die" era, I think it left me with the perspective that even if there is canon sexuality, then no matter what it is, you're free to then do whatever you want in fandom. People might call you a dick for it if you go about it in certain ways, but you're free to do it.

That said... that's not really what wanting canon confirmation is about. It's about having canon representation, especially for identities that we often don't see representation of. For example: Alastor being aromantic is "up for interpretation," and that specifically feels bad when it's explicitly been framed that way as a cop out to appease shippers (per Viv), especially when in canon you can see he's intended to be aroace based off of how Rosie talks about him.

Yes, things are better now than they were 15 years ago... but standards are higher now, too!

And in particular I think that while in 2008 or so, "It's up to interpretation!" basically meant "Yeah, they might be gay but I can't say it," nowadays the meaning has shifted. I see a lot of people chiming into any mention of aroace Alastor with this attitude of "Um, actually, he's NOT aromantic because it wasn't confirmed by Viv (even though he wasn't confirmed to NOT be aro either)," rather than the spirit of "Oh, yeah, he might be aro, that's a valid interpretation!" It actually feels very similar to seeing people go "Well, X is OBVIOUSLY straight (the default) because he wasn't confirmed to like men!"

...in 2008, haha.

Anyway, fandom always feels to me like a 'do whatever you want' zone, but I think just based off of the sheer volume and depth of genuine and heartfelt reactions people have had to Alastor as a character and his portrayal as aroace... having canon representation and seeing yourself in media you enjoy matters a great deal to many people.

I had a really emotional moment when I read my preorder of House of Hades from the Percy Jackson series back in middle school and realized that Nico di Angelo was an actual gay character in an actual real, physical book that I was holding in my hands, not "just" a headcanon from my nebulously safe online fandom spaces, for the first time ever. Similarly, people have been headcanoning various characters as ace for a long, long time, but to me it's never had the same punch to it as it being official when it comes to those kinds of feelings re: representation.

So leaving that kind of thing "up to interpretation" specifically as an alternative to providing representation to a group of people who rarely sees it is disappointing, but it's not for shipping reasons.

[pianokantzart]

My Theory on Pachacamac and The Iblis Trigger

There is talk about how much they changed Pachacamac from a warmongering, power hungry tribal leader, to a goofy grandpa figure, but I think the truth of Pachacamac's nature might be somewhere between the two interpretations. Despite his friendliness, you can't forget he did lead a clan that wiped out the owls with a singleminded focus on capturing Sonic and reclaiming The Master Emerald. Pachacamac, now a ghost, has visited Knuckles to tell him he needs to expand his tribe. There are no other echidnas left, so he asks the sole survivor to take on an apprentice. "Show him our customs, teach him our traditions, and soon our tribe will grow once again."

There is no acceptance or acknowledgement of the fact that the clan's current situation is the result of a bloody feud and the destruction of an entire race besides their own. There is also, unsettlingly, no acknowledgement of Tails, Sonic, or The Wachowskis as members of Knuckles' clan.

While there are questionable elements to Pachacamac's approach, his motivations are at least understandable. Knuckles is a minority– the last of his tribe and the only surviving member of his species, so of course his old chief wants to see their traditions and culture preserved.

Things only get really weird when Pachacamac takes hold of Wade– Knuckles' apprentice and the soon-to-be new addition to their clan–and rewrites history. Rather than the tale of a lone owl that the echidnas hunted down in a quest for power, the story is instead of an entire flock of owls that were the aggressors, killing off Knuckles' tribe and burning down his village for no reason other than for the sake of the slaughter.

Similarly, Knuckles isn't described as a lost child left behind, but a fellow warrior who battled alongside his father until the bitter end.

So, knowing that Pachacamac's version of events is wrought with lies leads to one very serious question: What is the true story of Knuckles' battle with Iblis? If there's one thing we know about The Echidna Clan, it's that they are fixated on raw power. They're a warrior-focused society where the best fighter gets the highest honor and the most privileges. They were the ones who crafted The Master Emerald from the seven chaos emeralds. They were the ones who tracked down Sonic when he was a child with the intention of obtaining his power, before Long Claw wiped them out in her final struggle.

And who else do we know that was accidentally unleashed in a reckless pursuit of power?

Iblis, the raw power of the sun god Solaris. Iblis, who was sealed away within a child using the power of the chaos emeralds.

Now, there's no doubt that "The Flames of Disaster" in the SCU are very different from "The Flames of Disaster" in Sonic 06. In the movie universe the flames are merely a type of wieldable power rather than the name of an apocalyptic event. However... what better way to rewrite the fact that the echidna tribe nearly caused the end of the world and locked an immortal fire demon within an echidna child, than by pretending that The Flames of Disaster is just an inherent ability Knuckles unlocked through an epic battle?

What if "The Flames of Disaster" wasn't a power he obtained through a magnificent fight, but a power he survived after it was thrusted upon him by his elders? ... What if one of the many, many reasons reasons his father didn't let him join the fight was out of fear of what would happen if he cried?

[pink-onyx-au]

Based solely on the last episode of season 5 where White Diamond pulled the Stevens apart I always thought of Pink Steven as robotic, you know like a computer, and he only starts having more expressions like humans when he and Organic Steven are together or near/touching each other. Like left and right brain. One side is for emotion and expression while the other is for logic and reasoning. Did you make Pink Steven expressive because him and Steven are together just fused together with Jasper? Also do Pink Steven and Steven think similarly like the same person they are, or are they thinking differently, since Pink Steven got mad with Jasper in an early chapter?

It’s a great question and one that I think answering will help those who wish to read this AU. So I am happy to answer.

I tend to believe that in CYM, gem Steven ripped away from his human self was no longer able to access his human emotions. He had his anger and his passion but no way to express it. Once he was able to just hold his human self and begin to fuse, he smiled, and laughed. He could feel again.

In this AU, Gem Steven is part of the whole "Steven", and thus is connected to his human abilities just like his human self is connected to his Gem powers. For the sake of this AU, as I know many many other interpretations are out there, I try to keep it vague so you can enjoy your own head-canon, too!

Both of them make the external character of Steven. The human-half is the self we show others. The gem half is the self we keep to ourselves. More or less. But they are both the same whole person. Human half will still be a bit more empathetic and gem half will still be a bit more impulsive, but they are blended because they are fused as our boi, Steven.

[xinfinityl0ve17]

Mana

"When I receive letters from fans, it makes me feel saved. I live each day in fear, trembling as I go about my life."

The symbolic mark that represents the keyword "transparent spiral" could indeed be seen on stage. Now that I think about it, hasn't Malice already incorporated similarly enigmatic and symbolic elements in the past? I feel like that might be the case.

"It’s true that we’ve lightly dabbled in that before," said Mana.

The mystery, left as a mystery being able to enjoy asking, "What could it possibly mean?" feels like a test of the audience's sensibilities. The abundant mysteries in their expressions are a significant part of their charm and exploring them is an enjoyable experience.

It isn’t necessarily anything overly occult or niche. The ability to enjoy a sense of mystery is something many people naturally possess. That’s precisely why they’ve managed to gather so many fans and captivate them. After all even someone with no prior knowledge simply seeing their photos would undoubtedly find them quite mysterious. One could even say they are overwhelmingly enigmatic.

At that point whether someone leaves it at “Oh, so there are people like this” or becomes curious enough to dive into their expressions saying “I want to hear and see more,” depends on the individual’s disposition. The fact that so many people are willing to explore further is what’s driving their growing popularity. In other words, it’s proof that the number of people capable of enjoying a sense of mystery is immeasurable.

However, I’d like to delve a bit deeper into the keyword “transparent spiral.” A spiral… a spiral staircase, perhaps?

"I think many people might say 'spiral staircase,' but that’s not it," said Közi.

Then perhaps it relates to genetics, DNA…?

"Oh, that’s sharp of you. It’s somewhat along those lines, like something intertwined. But I think it’s better to leave it up to individual interpretation from here on out," said Mana. He then added the following:

"The concept for incorporating dance into the opening stage revolves around the theme of a spiral that aligns with the first song, Je te veux."

This song, Je te veux, is a new track included on the album merveilles, set to release on March 18. The music was composed by Közi. According to him:

"It has a kind of ’80s new romantic vibe (lol)."

It’s a danceable song, but by listening to it and reading the lyrics, one might catch a glimpse of the concept of the spiral.

Ah, I mustn’t forget, Mana’s mention of the opening dance. Közi had previously said:

"We decided to make it like something MAX-level (a reference to a Japanese dance group), so we practiced a ton."

But what exactly is Mana’s concept?

"An image of a B-grade idol from space in the 1980s. Probably not something most people know about (lol)."

Speaking of which, around 1981, there was talk about idols said to have come from space...

[nyerusnova]

Glad to see that Tim being a giant Dick Grayson fanboy is finally being highlighted again, and sparking more discussion especially on their early relationship! (Please gimme more!!! I love them so much, augh!)

Probably as a result of that surge, there seems to be reciprocal chatter on the topic of how young Tim actually felt towards Jason, too. It's honestly pretty interesting, because it's more nuanced than it appears at first glance.

Which means it's very fun to dissect! ✨

There's a degree of subjectivity to keep in mind, because readers are going to have different interpretations of the same scenes, or will pull from entirely different scenes than one another to form their individual view on this topic. That's just how it is in comic book fandom, for many things! Regardless, in this case... if the scale ranges from the extreme of "Jason was Tim's Robin" to the other extreme of "Tim actually hated Jason [as Robin] or thought he was a loser that got himself killed" — the actual truth is closer to the middle, as is often the case.

At least, in my opinion.

Mainly I want to focus on those relatively early days with this post, to highlight Tim's initial(-ish) feelings towards his heroes, and touch on the point at which they really begin to change. This turned into a very long post, though. Brevity is beyond my skill, so grab snacks and water lol. Transcripts for each image will be posted at the very end under the cut.

So, the two storylines I want to cover are "Rite of Passage," which is rolls into "Identity Crisis." (NOT to be confused with the major crossover event "Identity Crisis™" which came years later, and is where Jack Drake dies.... But it sure is an interesting coincidence that Tim deals with the loss of each parent in two similarly named stories!) These take place before Tim is even Robin, and I'll be considering them as one arc for this post.

Detective Comics vol. 1 #618 (July, 1990) -- Pages 1 & 2

"When Gotham needed him, he was there. When the Batman needed him, he was there. He was a hero."

"One day, I'll be as good as Jason. One day I'll wear the suit."

To start off, we have this opening from "Rite of Passage." Tim is still in training here, mainly helping Bruce with minor stuff from the cave. His parents are off traveling, alive and well as of these next few pages. He's still bright-eyed and full of wonder. An extraordinarily weird but ultimately innocent kid.

So his view on Jason is positive and fairly simple: a hero, and someone to look up to as Robin. Clearly, Tim here doesn't think Jason was deficient in his role, either as a protector of Gotham or as Batman's trusted partner.

Moreover, Tim already held Dick in very high regard because he was amazingly skilled before he became Robin. To Tim, that's not something he'll ever be able to achieve. Meanwhile, Jason wasn't like that. He was a regular kid without crazy acrobatic training since practically birth. Yet he still went on to be a hero—which is obviously motivational for Tim who finds himself in similar shoes.

It's true that Tim only ever knew or thought of Jason as Robin, and idolized him in that regard. But that's kind of all that mattered to him at that point, because he was this kid who was utterly star-struck by his heroes. Even if he's technically aware of their shortcomings as people, it's overshadowed by the hero-worship.

It was kind of the same with Bruce as Batman at first. (Which was still enough for Tim to risk life and limb to help his beloved hero, before Bruce even knew his name.) Dick was the only one Tim had any sort of "personal" relationship with beforehand, so there is an extra level of attachment—and hence why it was the nidus for his obsession with Batman. Yet even then, it wasn't like he actually knew anything about Dick as a person until later. Until then, Tim's ideas of him were all he had, too. With Jason, Tim just didn't get to know him at any point before his return (oof), apart from what he heard over the years secondhand (also oof).

Ultimately, it's the loss of innocence—along with the ricocheting bullet that is the unresolved guilt of those around him—that begins to change Tim's perception. Not just of Jason, but of things in general.

Batman vol. 1 #455 (Oct., 1990) -- Page 13

"I know why they do it now. Why they put on the suits, and the masks, and go out into the night. They're angry, they're full of rage. They want to hit back."

Losing his mother was a major shift for Tim, obviously. This is right after the previous storyline, and Tim's had the worst week or two of his life (so far). His monologue here is a reference to what happened to both Dick and Jason. The unbearable pain of loss, the rage masking the grief underneath. And importantly, that he feels both of them were justified in their anger. (And Bruce too, indirectly.)

The major theme of the aptly named "Identity Crisis" is to mirror aspects of Dick and Jason and Tim's lives—to show how they converged onto the same tragic road. It's something that Tim notices early in the story, and was frightened by. Now, horrifically, it's become a part of him as well. His parents are gone, and he was entirely helpless to do anything about it. Dick was the same way, Jason was the same way. The cycle is repeated.

In particular, the part about him wanting to go to Haiti for revenge—for his mother—sort of struck me as being an intentional parallel to Jason and Ethiopia. It's a bit of a stretch, especially in isolation, so others may see it differently (e.g. the angry ramblings of a grieving child that does sound like something anyone might say). But it always stuck out to me because of how much Tim is compared directly to Jason in this arc. More on that below.

It's not something I can really give an accurate feel of because it's a lot of subtle things that begin to add up, so I'd encourage folks to read this arc themselves to see what I mean. (Or maybe you'll still disagree which is fine too lol.) Again, many things are in reference to both Dick and Jason in relation to Tim, but it's weighted more on Jason's side.

Batman vol. 1 #455 (Oct., 1990) -- Page 18

"You think my anger will boil over, the way Jason's did. I can assure you, it won't!"

Tim's grief has begun to pull away the veil of idealism that enshrouded his heroes in his mind. It doesn't apply only to Jason, but to the rest of them. Plus add the fact that Tim's keenly aware that he's being managed, even if the adults around him are careful to not outright say certain things. He still knows.

Bruce, Dick, and Alfred are all worried about Tim potentially turning into "another Jason." They (and mainly Bruce) caution Tim to not ignore his emotions, but they're still concerned that he may be overly eager to prove himself in order to cope, and could get hurt or killed as a result. While they aren't wrong for their caution—especially at how unsettlingly similar all the circumstances are—they aren't very subtle about the elephant in the room.

Imagine how that would affect Tim's perception of his predecessor, especially when he's in the midst of a traumatic event he hasn't had time to fully process. The negative association is pretty much inevitable.

Tim's known from day one that he's walking in Jason's shadow, and now it's become inescapable. Tim went from seeing Jason as a goal to reach, to feeling that unless he surpasses him, he wasn't going to be taken seriously by anyone. However, as of this arc, Tim doesn't even fully come to that point yet.

Batman vol. 1 #456 (Nov., 1990) -- Pages 14 & 15

"Drop-outs don't make it. And dead heroes are no use to anyone!"

It's really easy to take away "Tim totally thought Jason got himself killed" as the main thing here, but I think that's missing the forest for the trees.

First some context: Bruce has gone out on a mission to get Scarecrow, and expressly forbade Tim from doing any shenanigans. Meanwhile, Tim is grappling with wanting to prove himself and trying to help Bruce from the cave, all while trying to deal with his emotions. At some point, he falls asleep and ends up having like... exhaustion-grief hallucinations of Dick!Robin and Jason!Robin who confusingly caution yet encourage him. The main theme of this part is facing your fears.

Depending on how you want to interpret the intent of Jason's dialogue here, you could go several ways with it. Ranging from "writer's feelings towards Jason" to "a peek into Tim's mind as his fears manifest as visions of his heroes" or some mixture thereof.

Though Tim argues with Bruce that Batman needs a Robin, we're shown that Tim is understandably scared of joining Batman's "war." He's still not willing to let Bruce go it alone, though, and that's something he feels more strongly than his fear.

Meanwhile, hallucination!Jason's warnings are a lamentation of what happened to him in a way, but it actually exactly describes Tim's current situation even more so. Unlike Jason, Tim is under-trained, under-experienced, doesn't even have a suit of his own yet. But like Jason, he can't sit by and do nothing while someone he cares about is in danger. Tim knows that if he goes out there, he will probably get himself killed, and it will be his own fault. So he's about to disobey Batman's orders, and fly right into danger. If that got Jason killed, then Tim—who is in a way worse position experience-wise—has every chance of ending up the same.

Like... it's about Jason, but it's also about Tim. It's Tim's worst fears made manifest, via the representation of why he is even here in the first place (Jason's death).

That's my theory anyway, but perhaps this is an overly charitable reading of this scene on my end. (Not that I think that makes me wrong lol.) However given that Grant wrote both parts of this arc, and the beginning of which is especially favorable towards Jason, it certainly is something to ponder. I have a lot of thoughts on it I can't expand on here tbh but perhaps that'll be another post.

Anyway, returning to the point of the similarities vs differences between Tim and Jason: since this is the arc that solidified Tim as the next Robin in comic continuity, it makes sense that the writers really pushed the comparisons between the two of them, specifically. (Even though Dick was pretty similar, as going against Batman's orders is the Robin thing to do, it's not his shoes Tim is directly filling.) So making Tim's "debut" story arc mirror Jason's "swansong" is an obvious narrative choice.

To drive home the parallels, I wanted to include this panel from just a few pages prior to the "daydream":

Batman vol. 1 #456 (Nov., 1990) -- Page 9

"The suit is magic."

That so distressingly close to Jason's famous "being Robin gives me magic" line (Batman #385, page 6). Given all the previous context, it's hard for me to just dismiss it as pure coincidence. Even if it is, the point still stands. Tim is shown having the some of the same heartbreakingly naive views as Jason once did, right in front of Jason's memorial, just as he's about to go and run off into the night against orders.

I think that speaks for itself. There's a lot to take away from it, if you so choose. Especially given the context of that specific Jason arc.

Alright, back to the main course:

So in the end, Tim actually goes out in civvies and a ski mask because if he fails, then at least he wouldn't bring shame to Robin's legacy™. When he gets fear gassed saving Batman, it's once again both Dick and Jason that he hallucinates encouraging him to push past his fear. (Shout out to the fact that he's literally more afraid of tarnishing the legacy of Batman & Robin than he is of dying.... I'm sure this will not be a recurring thing for him in the future.)

Tim's ideology is shown to be similar to Jason's, and the actions Tim ultimately takes are similar to Jason's... but the outcome is different. And it really isn't just "Tim succeeded where Jason failed." At least, that's not what I took away from this. Rather, Tim had no reason to succeed any more than he had to fail, just that he did. Luck combined with caution because he knew what happened to his predecessor, and the fact that Batman was there to finish the job all made the difference.

You could say (and I know some will) that it's just classic Jason character assassination and the writers trying to implore readers that this new kid is different we promise pls don't hate us look how much better he is! But in this case, that feels like it undermines the whole point of this story. It doesn't fit with what the characters actually say.

Thus, we return to the question of how Tim felt towards his predecessor. And the answer is different from where we started, because Tim is different. Not that different though. Because even though at this point Tim—like all the adults around him—has probably attributed Jason "going off on his own" being what led to his death, Tim still thought of him as a hero to look up to. It's about Robin, first and foremost, yes. But Tim is fully aware of the people who made that suit mean what it does, because it's all intertwined.

Batman vol. 1 #457 (Dec., 1990) -- Page 20

"I mean--Dick made it into a symbol the whole world knows. Jason gave his life for it."

Even further, Tim thinks of it in terms of Jason having given his life for what he believed in, for the legacy that now falls to Tim. There's a sense of gravitas there. He's afraid of failing both the Robins who came before him.

Ultimately do I think Tim adored and loved Jason on the same level as Dick or something? No. It's not comparable. (Dick was like part of some of Tim's earliest memories and everything! They have a really unique bond ok.) Yet Tim was also far from thinking poorly of Jason so early on. Frankly, it seems that Tim thought of Jason as a noble hero and a cautionary tale. Yes he took risks and sometimes went too far, generally stuff that Tim doesn't want to repeat and all that. At the same time, Tim still saw him as someone whose legacy and memory was worth honoring.

It's complicated, which is why I like it so much—because it feels real. Having conflicting feelings towards someone is... so human. Especially someone you never got to know, yet who plays such an integral role in your life via the shadow of their death. How can you feel anything but complicated towards them?

It has to be said that, yes, Tim's views—even before Jason's return—change over the years. He becomes more jaded as a person and is surrounded by people who are even more jaded than him... and who often mention Jason as the "failed Robin." It's something that's hung over Tim's head all the damn time. The curse of the Robin mantle.

So it shouldn't come as a surprise that Tim's idea of him becomes more akin to "sounds like a skill issue" as the years go by. All bets are off after Jason's return, and the Titans Tower Incident™. At that point it's firmly "I am better than you, loser" lmao.

And... that's all without getting too into things like authorial intent and general "moods" of different DC writers towards Jason at a given point. Or retcons that played a role in his characterization and how other characters talk about him, depending on what "era" you're reading. That's way beyond the scope of this post though!

TLDR; even though young Tim Drake was obsessed with Dick Grayson as Robin, he still looked up to Jason Todd as well. He didn't think of Jason as a cringefail loser until later. :)

(image dialogue transcripts under cut ↓)

Dialogue Transcript for Image 1 (Detective Comics vol. 1 #618 -- Page 1):

Narration box (Tim): When Gotham needed him, he was there. When the Batman needed him, he was there. He was a hero.

Dialogue Transcript for Image 2 (Detective Comics vol. 1 #618 -- Page 2):

(Scene continued from previous page)

Narration box: But he was nothing special, really. Just a boy, who was taught--trained--brought to his full potential by someone who knew how. Just a boy... like me. I know I can do it. I know I can. One day I'll be as good as Jason. One day I'll wear the suit. One day I'll be a hero.

Dialogue Transcript for Image 3 (Batman vol. 1 #455 -- Page 13):

Tim: I hate him! I hate him! I know why they do it now. Why they put on the suits, and the masks, and go out into the night. They're angry. Full of rage. They want to hit back. They want to fill the hole that's burning inside them.

Bruce: There's more to it than that, son. Much more.

Tim: I know. It's just--I feel--like going to Haiti myself and strangling that creep with my bare hands!

Bruce: The Obeah Man will spend the rest of his life in a prison hospital. He's history. Forget him! But don't fight against your anger. It's natural. Accept it. Live with it. One day it'll be your friend.

Dialogue Transcript for Image 4 (Batman vol. 1 #455 -- Panels from page 18):

Tim: Because you think my mother's death has upset me too much. Well, it did. But I've taken your words to heart. I can cope. You think my anger will boil over, the way Jason's did. I can assure you, it won't. But that doesn't make any difference, does it? Why can't you have a little faith in me?

Dialogue Transcript for Image 5 (Batman vol. 1 #456 -- Page 14):

Narration box (Tim): Blast it! My head's starting to swim. I'm about ready to give up. I almost wish I'd never heard of Batman and Robin!

Vision Dick: Heroes never give up, Tim.

Vision Jason: You know that.

Tim: Dick--! Jason Todd!

Vision Dick: You're training to fight in a war, Tim. It'll last all your life. No matter what, you have to go on fighting.

Vision Jason: Drop-outs don't make it. And dead heroes are no use to anyone! I thought I knew better than Batman. I thought I could run before I could walk. I killed myself, Tim. Because I couldn't wait. Because I couldn't think it through.

Dialogue Transcript for Image 6 (Batman vol. 1 #456 -- Page 15):

(Scene continued from previous page)

Vision Dick: Think, Tim. Concentrate!

Vision Jason: You can do it.

Both: You can do it!

Tim, waking up: What--? Robin...?

Narration box (Tim): I must have been daydreaming. They're right, though. There's a solution to everything. I can find it! So here I go again... Whim. Caprice. Doing something without forethought.

Dialogue Transcript for Image 7 (Batman vol. 1 #456 -- Panel from page 9):

Narration box (Tim): The suit is magic. It gives you power. It hides your weakness. It makes you give it everything you've got. It makes you a hero. If only I could!

Dialogue Transcript for Image 8 (Batman vol. 1 #457 -- Page 20):

Bruce: Are you afraid of it?

Tim: No. It isn't fear. It's more... the suit carries so much history. I mean--Dick made it into a symbol the whole world knows. Jason gave his life for it. Failing them--what they fought so hard to build--that's what worries me!

Bruce: I appreciate that, Tim. That costume weighs a whole lot more than any symbol should... and I'd be failing you if I expected you to bear that weight. So... let me know what you think.

Narration box: A mask has a double edged, he said. It hides your own anxiety as it strikes fear into your enemy.

[demodraws0606]

TW/ Slightly heated (no hate to those i'm talking about, i just need to rant about it a little) (also it's definitely just me ranting about a drawing of a character in a fanganronpa keep that in mind LOL)

I'll be honest, people who are handwaving Whit's creepy expression as just "oh he's just finally caring" slightly...irk me ?

It feels on the same level as people who said back then that the tape disappearing was just an "animation error".

The story makes it so clear at every turn to not have Whit express anything towards the execution or the deaths around him. If this was him being unable to save Levi and having to watch him die...then why does he react nonchalant to the execution ?

In fact Whit's reaction to Min's execution more so sounds like Whit is trying to have a normal reaction and failing but that's like another thing.

The way his sprite is drawn as well just is not like other "breakdown sprites" we've seen, like it's straight up factual, his eyes just straight up are drawn similarly to David and Xander's sprites (I checked there aren't other expressions that depicts it). He also doesn't sweat which is very common for a lot of stressed sprite.

And i'm not even talking about his arm suspiciously being behind his back.

We KNOW sprites end up foreshadowing things in the future, we quite literally saw it with Arei with her reaction to the murder secret.

The idea of Whit just being stressed just is not in character with what has been shown of Whit's character thus far and it doesn't fit the expression that's drawn on him or the suspicious hand behind his back.

"You're just thinking too hard about it" "It's not that complicated" Then why am I fan of DRDT at all, like why am I a fan of a fan series based on a MURDER MYSTERY series if everything can just be handwaved by the magic words that are "you're just thinking too hard about it !".

Just because an explanation is simpler doesn't mean it's more accurate or more likely to happen, people who make more complex theories aren't "overthinking" things they are simply trying to make a prediction that works unlike the more simple interpretations that are riddled by contradictions.

I've technically fallen victims of "overthinking" at times like my Hu theories however Ace being the culprit answered a lot of my issues with mostly just one exception that is relatively minor in context of everything. Ace being the culprit also still was given very nice foreshadowing and hints to munch on.

The point of red herrings is that they surprise you with more fitting and compelling twists. Brushing off Whit's entire suspicious behavior as a red herring is just lazy analysis because I could do that with pretty much any theory ever. Sure Whit could be a mastermind herring however his behavior itself can't be a red herring, he has something going on and that's what's setup, what that will be will only be discovered later on.

I made my fair share of very wild theories but this isn't about Mastermind Whit or Timeloop Whit, this is about Whit's character and how he's been written thus far. People are trying too hard to woobify him into the "happy go lucky character actually is secretly sad" even though DRDT has made sure to often counterarc very overdone tropes (Nico for exemple).

Like my girl Eden was given more suspicion for WAY LESS.

[mari-lair]

Something I found especially interesting after this chapter was the difference in views between Teru and Akane. More specifically I think it’s interesting how Akane claims to hate supernaturals, just like how Teru does but he still goes out of his way in this chapter to defend Mirai and Kako… Obviously we’ve seen in the court arc that he clearly does care for them but still I just think it’s interesting and was wondering if you had any good thoughts and analysis on it (after all your so good at that kinda thing :))))

Akane has a reluctant soft spot for the clock keepers, deep down, but I'm a firm believer that his lackluster attempt to defend Mirai and Kako wasn't born from a place of faith or care, it was out of fear. He shares the same fear as Teru. I talk about why I interpreted it like that here.

But the chapter still show a very interesting diference in view between Teru and Akane when they learn Yugi Amane used to be a teacher.

Akane is the one who calls this teacher a murderer. Teru's focus is on how he is an adult here.

Teru also calls him by name. Consistently.

Usually, he only refers to supernaturals by their role or their seat position. Doesn't matter if he is happy, angry, or neutral. It's never by name.

This shows Teru is still separating one timeline from the other. It's hard to say if he believes Amane is a bad person or not, but Teru does seem to have decided Amane Yugi is a person, not a supernatural.

He brought up Amane's happiness to make Nene reconsider staying in this world, 100%, but I do think there is a hint of honesty to this question. I wonder what he think of the idea of a ghost, a doomed being, having an actual life, with a job, and such.

It contrasts with how Akane is treating this timeline as a reality. deciding 'Hanako is still Hanako so he is a murderer' despite not knowing anything about Professor Yugi, and 'Aoi is still the same Aoi at heart. I love her' even after seeing her differences from og Aoi.

Akane is just following his program. ("Aoi is doubting my love!" -> "I will reassure her she is the only one for me.") Which falls on their old pre-severance routine, since the original Aoi main issue used to be her lack of belief she is lovable and while the New Timeline Aoi was acting differently, she still displayed the same possessive and insecure behaviors as pre-severance Aoi used to, not wanting Akane to be too close to a girl. Still, Akane has no way of knowing if this engaged Aoi is the same as the og one. He is just assuming based on the old timeline.

(unrelated but it's interesting that Akane went from "I'll love you my whole life" to "I'll love you my whole life... No, even after that" cause he is the last person to think about becoming a supernatural. It makes me wonder if part of him is aware each timeline is a completely different world, a different life... but I don't have enough insight on him yet for that, is just food for thought/headcanons.)

The main gag of this chapter is Akane treating others like their old selves while Teru treat them as separated from their old timeline counterparts.

Teru is being a brat here, but he is right. This Aoi has none of the experiences Akane has. Akane needs to adapt.

Similarly, when he talks about the person Nene fell in love with, he isn't talking about a teacher Nene never met, he is talking about the ghost murderer we are familiar with.

I think if I were to put the difference in their view (not their approach just their view) in a very simplified box, I would say Teru sees supernaturals as unsavable and dangerous, while Akane sees them as unforgivable and dangerous.

[squgs]

The general assumption around Criston and Alicent's relationship is that it's some toxic, unhealthy thing that they both settle for because they have no one else to turn to. This is an interesting reading of them, but based on the few scenes of them together that we have they seem to be the healthiest partnership in the show.

Of all the partnerships between men and women, Criston and Alicent's is the only one with a genuine balance of power. In every other pairing the man is in control and does not allow their woman to make decisions for the pair or for herself. We see Corlys ignore Rhaenys's input and wish's about betrothing Laenor and Rhaenyra and about disinheriting Baela and we can assume from her discomfort that she rose similar ignored objections about pushing Viserys to marry Laena. We see Viserys abuse both his wives and ignore their wishes for bodily autonomy. We see Daemon murder one wife, ignore the wishes of another and then belittle and assault his third wife until she complies with his wishes.

In sharp contrast to those dynamics, Alicent is clearly the one in charge in her relationship with Criston. However Alicent is not overbearing and controlling with Criston. On driftmark he is able to tell her no. He decides what he is willing to do for her and seemingly does not fear any retaliation for his decisions. The exact reasoning behind Criston's decision not to try to take Luke's eye are up for interpretation, but we don't really see any other partnership on the show where the subservient party's refusal is respected.

The only maybe comparable relationship is Rhaenyra's relationship with Laenor and Harwin. We see so little of the three of them that its hard to draw conclusions, but Rhaenyra does seem to be in charge. However she's clearly frustrated with Laenor's failures as a husband and is unable to get him to perform his duties. It's fairly clear that the planned partnership they had in episode 5 has failed, to the point that Rhaenyra gets rid of him in episode 7. Alicent and Criston's partnership on the other hand seems to be going strong after over 15 years.

There are a variety of ways that people say that the Alicent Criston dynamic is toxic. The most common is the view that Criston holds Alicent on a pedestal and doesn't actually know or see the real her only an idolized view of the Madonna in contrast to Rhaenyra the whore. I don't think that reading fits with what we see of their interactions. Criston is unflinchingly at Alicent's side in her ugliest moments. Alicent is willing to rant about Rhaenyra's bastards to him, showing her neuroticism and anxiety and anger. She shows no fear of being judged for what she says and I think we're meant to assume such venting sessions are a common occurrence for them. Alicent's behavior in that scene does not in anyway resemble an idolized divine image of the mother and yet Criston is not at all surprised or resentful or disturbed, in fact he's comfortable enough with Alicent being like that that he gets similarly petty (and misogynistic). Again on driftmark Criston sees Alicent at her lowest, most human and angry. While he is unwilling or unable to take Luke's eye he rushes to her side the moment she goes to attack Rhaenyra. Again this is Alicent at her least stereotypically motherly, least divine, most violent and angry and we don't see Criston be bothered by her not fitting into the image of her that he's created. The idea of Alicent needing to play the role of divine mother to maintain support is very interesting, but it doesn't really fit with her behavior around Criston. Playing that part is extremely difficult, it's literally an impossible standard that women are held to, and it takes constant effort. If Alicent was doing that with Criston we would see that effort and her fear at the moments when her facade slips, but instead we see Alicent trusting Criston with her most vulnerable and human moments.

Another way people say Alicent and Criston are toxic is to say that Alicent is afraid of Criston and only keeping him around because she can weaponize his hatred of Rhaenyra and point it at her enemies. Their is certainly some truth to Criston having a violent streak that he struggles to control. However in episode 9 it is very clear that Alicent doesn't need to fear him or manipulate him, and that his loyalty to her has nothing to do with hating Rhaenyra. Criston shows his loyalty two notable times in the episode. The first is after he kills Beesbury (which to be clear was bad. Murder is wrong), when Westerling and Criston are facing off. Alicent tells him to lower his sword and he does so. When one of the only comparably skilled swordsmen in the world has his blade at Criston's throat and Alicent tells him to lower his sword he does so without question. He unflinchingly trusts Alicent's judgement with his life. There is every possibility that Westerling will just kill him there, but he doesn't hesitate or complain or do anything but obey his queen, trusting her attempt to deescalate the situation. The second time is when Alicent asks Criston to find Aegon for her. Criston was at the council meeting, and since he's not an idiot he understands that the stakes of the search for Aegon is Rhaenyra's life. He is actively choosing to do something that he knows will save Rhaenyra's life because Alicent asks him to. That completely destroys the idea that his loyalty and relationship to Alicent has anything to do with hating Rhaenyra. In fact if he was motivated by hatred of Rhaenyra he would be the obvious choice to lead the assassination trip to dragonstone. Otto would obviously know that, but he still thought he had a better chance asking Westerling who has been protecting Rhaenyra since she was a child than he did asking Criston.

(Side note: the whole idea of Otto asking a knight who is loyal to Rhaenyra to do an assassin's job is absolutely ridiculous. Given that Otto is competent at his job and has known this would be happening he should absolutely have actual assassins lined up to do what they're best at. However I'm ignoring that for this analysis to view the episode as written.)

A final way that people say Alicent and Criston is toxic is that they enable each other with the delusion that they are good people because they follow the rules of society. While I do think that they enable each other in some ways. It's not that they let each other pretend that they're good people, they let each other be good people, by being good to each other. Alicent protects someone she barely knows, in a way that is actively detrimental to her political goals, simply because Criston does not deserve to be scandalized, have his family's name ruined and then be tortured to death. Criston serves an honorable queen, being a father to her children and respecting her when seemingly no one else does. The lie that they enable isn't that they're good, it's that being good means anything. They can convince each other that 'in the end honor and decency will prevail' even when they are each others only evidence of that fact.

Now with all that said, I'm not arguing that Alicent and Criston's relationship should only be viewed as wholesome and healthy and lovely (though it can be). They are both traumatized as fuck and are products of their terrible society that they can't escape, and may not even understand well enough to want to escape. There is so much stuff to dig into without resorting to a simplistic terrible version of their relationship, especially when thinking about them attempting to have a romantic or sexual relationship.

So yeah people should view alicole as more than just terrible Alicent's punishment for not defeating the patriarchy and being liberated like Rhaenyra.

[lu-is-not-ok]

Btw, me and a friend have been working on a theory about what the defensive skills could mean, and I wanted to know your thoughts on it

(Apologies if there's already a post about them and I just missed it hfkdjfj)

We thought that maybe it could be the way the sinner reacts to external threats, either physical (like in combat) or psychological.

So essentially, Defense would be closing themself off, or isolating, ignoring the threat by putting up a defensive shell. Using the gameplay mechanics, it could work (for a while), but there's also a chance that the threat is stronger than anticipated and can breach through anyway.

Somewhat similarly, Evade would be running away from the problem, avoiding thinking about it at all, or distracting themself and/or suppressing it in one way or another. Once again using the gameplay, it would depend on a lot of factors when it comes to whether they could avoid it successfully this time, or take the full hit anyway.

And we thought Counter could be something like lashing out. Taking the full hit, internalizing and then attempting to hit back. That's pretty much what the gameplay mechanic would be too, putting yourself at risk just to get a chance at hitting back, or accepting the inevitable hit.

And then the Sin Affinity could possibly be the reasoning, or how the action is conducted. Taking N Corp Sinclair for example, I interpreted it as closing himself off from everything around him (Defense) and ignoring the consequences of his actions for the sake of carrying out his "mission" (Pride), thus reaching some respite in the form of SP.

But this is just a base idea and doesn't go into the subtypes (like counters that can be clashed with), and your analysis posts tend to go more in depth, so... Any thoughts?

Yeah that sounds about right from what I've been thinking. It's definitely something you can see with how some Sinners behave as well.

Take Hong Lu for example. In Canto 7 we see his trauma response be just trying to get the conversation over with by no longer trying to be invested in it - he's Evading the percieved threat via Sloth (apathy).

Though I'd say Guard could be just as much ignoring the threat as it could be simply just taking whatever comes at them.

Look at Gregor at the end of Canto 1, he takes full responsibility for the failure of the mission and actively puts himself down while doing so. He's just taking it all as if Guarding, while focusing on the negativity and his past through Gloom.

[autumnmobile12]

Odysseus and Calypso Were Lovers

As problematic as that sounds because WTF, hear me out because it's complicated and there's a lot to discuss. Trigger warning for sa. Also, not directly Epic: The Musical related; that's a whole other ballpark.

She trapped him on her island!

I'm not denying that nor am I denying how objectively messed up that is.

However, the captor and prisoner trope is one that does crop up in Greek mythology now and then.  The most famous example I can think of is Hades’ kidnapping of Persephone.  I have seen that situation blatantly called rape in the original story, and yet today, modern storytellers do like to revise that myth into a version that makes Demeter out to be an overbearing mother and Persephone's ‘kidnapping’ so to speak becomes an escape.  Personally, I think that is a very graceful way to make a barbaric story a bit more palatable to modern audiences.

So regarding Odysseus’ situation where falling in love with his captor is problematic…my thought process runs as, “Fucking Greek mythology and its weird idea of what constitutes as a love story.”

As a result, I have no serious thoughts on the morality of certain figures of Greek mythology because they frankly come from a time period where the people had a very different culture and set of moral values and ideas on what was acceptable. Therefore, it's futile to judge their stories by my own modern moral compass.

Where in The Odyssey does it say they were lovers?

The main line I can't ignore that strongly implies the nature of their relationship is Odysseus' farewell to Calypso:

“The sun went down and brought the darkness on. They  [Odysseus and Calypso] went inside the hollow cave and took the pleasure of their love, held close together.”  - The Odyssey, Homer, translated by Emily Wilson.

Keep in mind, she’s already told him he’s free to go.  He’s free to build his raft, she’s giving him supplies, and yet he says goodbye this tenderly.  Note the absence of Calypso using magic to compel him. If you cherry-picked this line, you'd find a fond goodbye.

Odysseus’ Tears

A lot of people making the ‘Odysseus/Calypso was a non-consensual situation’ argument like to cite the line that Odysseus cried every day on Ogygia.  And yes, he did weep every day he was there.  But this is the full stanza.

“On the tenth black night, the gods carried me till I reached the island of Ogygia, home of the beautiful and mighty goddess Calypso.  Lovingly she cared for me, vowing to set me free from death and time forever.  But she never swayed my heart.  I stayed for seven years; she gave me clothes like those of gods, but they were always wet with tears.” - The Odyssey, Homer, translated by Emily Wilson.

‘Beautiful and mighty….Lovingly she cared for me….she never swayed my heart.’  He speaks highly of her, not with hate or venom for her delaying him.

In my literature class where we read The Odyssey, the tears line was discussed and largely interpreted as Odysseus’ reaction to all the monsters he’d faced and losing all his crew and friends.  The PTSD of a war veteran.  From the cultural mindset of Ancient Greece, Odysseus was a king, and he failed his people when they all died under his command and he was unable to bring them home.  Similarly, the hero Theseus was once king of Athens.  He was usurped in absentia (Theseus being trapped in the Underworld at the time) and when he returned to his kingdom, he found another man on his throne, was forced to flee, and died a rather ignoble death when a supporter of his usurper shoved him off a cliff.  So Odysseus being a king who let an entire fleet die under his watch is certainly grounds for shame to the point of tears in the eyes of the Ancient Greeks.  And with an entire line-up of men attempting to court his wife and take his place, it drives home the idea that he was replaceable.

Also important to note:  He’s still miserable when he leaves Ogygia.  When he arrives at King Alcinous’ court, he is welcomed, provided food, shelter, and entertainment, but when the king checks in with his heartbroken guest, he pleads with him to tell him what’s wrong, which kickstarts the telling of Odysseus’ journey.

Odysseus was afraid of Calypso!

That said, it's also important to address this concept because this is Odysseus' reaction to the goddess telling him she is sending him on his way to Ithaka:

‘Goddess, your purpose cannot be as you say; you cannot intend to speed me home. You tell me to make myself a raft to cross the great gulf of ocean--a gulf so baffling and so perilous that not even rapid ships will traverse it, steady though they may be and favoured by a fair wind from Zeus. I will not set foot on such a raft unless I am sure of your good will--unless, goddess, you take on yourself to swear a solemn oath not to plot against me any new mischief to my ruin.’ The Odyssey, Homer, translated by Shewring.

His suspicion certainly suggests mistrust and fear that she intends to do him harm, and considering his track record of being hated by deities, that's understandable. This isn't exactly what you'd call a loving relationship. But this also brings up a weird contradiction in the poem. I would 100% say this was a completely non-consensual situation were it not for this line:

His eyes were always tearful; he wept sweet life away, in longing to go back home, since she [Calypso] no longer pleased him. - Wilson.

Not ‘she did not please him.’  She no longer pleased him.  That implies she 'pleased' him at one point and because of that, one could argue Calypso was a mistress and Odysseus eventually tired of her. (Probably long before seven years had passed.)

What Do The Translators Say?

I can't speak for all translators, but in the Emily Wilson translation, she includes a lengthy introduction describing Odysseus' world, the culture of Ancient Greece, the reasoning behind specific English wordage in the translation, etc. In the introduction, she refers to Calypso and Circe as Odysseus' affairs. Not his abusers. He also has a brief flirtation with Princess Nausicaa, the daughter of his final host, King Alcinous. Wilson then goes on to describe how these affairs are not a character failing of Odysseus in comparison to the treatment of Penelope where she is expected to be faithful and how that is indicative of a good woman.

Taking a step back from Greek mythology, consider the actions of King Henry VIII of England. Most historians agree that, for the first few years, the king's relationship with his first wife Katherine of Aragon was unusually good for the times. And yet he was an unfaithful husband, had at least one acknowledged bastard and historians speculate there were more. But while 'indiscretions' such as this were frowned upon in the Tudor Period, Henry VIII did not receive near as much criticism as Queen Katherine would have if she'd had an illegitimate child. If Katherine was 'indiscreet,' that was considered treason because she compromised the legitimacy of the succession and that was cause for a beheading.

Because misogyny. Again, different time, different moral values.

Misogyny in The Odyssey

Whatever one's thoughts on Calypso are, it is incredibly misogynistic of Homer to solely blame her for keeping Odysseus trapped while he conveniently ignores the plot hole that her island is completely surrounded by ocean and we all know that Poseidon was lurking out there just waiting for his shot at vengeance.  Odysseus is barely two stanzas off Calypso’s island before Poseidon goes after him.  It’s almost hilarious how quickly it happens.  The poem says Poseidon was returning from Ethiopia, not that he was there for the whole seven years, and Hermes clearly did not pass along the memo that Odysseus was free to return to Ithaka.  Although I like to imagine it was Zeus who forgot about Poseidon’s grudge against Odysseus, and Hermes, being the mischievous scamp that he is, did not remind him.

If one line in the text says Odysseus/Calypso was consensual while another says otherwise, which is it?

Honestly, I don't think there's a conclusive answer with just The Odyssey. I'm a hobbyist, not an expert, so I do refer to the judgment of translators like Wilson to make that call. If she and other translators say Calypso and Circe were affair partners and I can see the lines in the text to support that, I'll believe it and chalk up the rest as Greek mythology being problematic.

That said, we can also look at the opinions of other Greek poets in their further writings of the mythology:

“And the bright goddess Calypso was joined to Odysseus in sweet love, and bare him Nausithous and Nausinous.” - The Theogony; Of Goddesses and Men, Hesiod, translated by Evelyn-White.

“… after brief pleasure in wedlock with the daughter of Atlas [Calypso], he [Odysseus] dares to set foot in his offhand vessel that never knew a dockyard and to steer, poor wretch…” - Alexandra, Lycophron, translated by Mair.

Both seem to be of the opinion Calypso was Odysseus' lover.

Interestingly, Hesiod also writes in The Catalogues of Women Fragment:

“…of patient-souled Odysseus whom in aftertime Calypso the queenly nymph detained for Poseidon.” - The Catalogues of Women Fragment, Hesiod, translated by Evelyn-White.

The wording ‘detained for Poseidon’ implies Calypso was acting at Poseidon’s command or she was doing the sea god a favor or she possibly didn't have any free will herself whether or not Odysseus stayed on Ogygia. Either way, it does neatly account for Homer's aforementioned misogyny/plot hole.

But if Hesiod and Lycophron's works are not part of The Odyssey, why should we take them seriously?

You don't have to consider them canon. Just because I prefer to consider all mythology canon doesn't mean anyone else does. Just as easily, I could ask why we should take Homer's work seriously even though historians can't even agree whether or not he was a real person.

The truth is, Ancient Greece as we think of it lasted a thousand years.  Their culture/values changed several times and so did their stories to reflect those changes, and those stories continue to evolve to the modern day. Odysseus himself goes through a few different descriptions over the centuries, being described as scheming and even cruel in other works. So I consider modern works like Percy Jackson, Epic: The Musical, Son of Zeus, and so on to be just more cogs in the evolving narrative. Much like how retellings of Hades and Persephone are shifting to circumstances easier to accept by audiences today.

But why would Odysseus be unfaithful to his loving wife?

The loving wife he claimed as payment for helping out King Tyndareus? Yeah...Odysseus and Penelope's relationship may not quite be the undoubted loving one modern retellings make it out to be nor is Odysseus a saint in The Odyssey.

“A blast of wind pushed me [Odysseus] off course towards the Cicones in Ismarus.  I sacked the town and killed the men.  We took their wives and shared their riches equally amongst us.”  - The Odyssey, Homer, translated by Emily Wilson.

Raiding a town unprovoked, killing the men, kidnapping the women, stealing their treasure is not indicative to what we in the modern day consider heroic or good protagonist behavior. Also, at the end of the Trojan War, Queen Hekuba was made a slave and given to Odysseus.

As for the chapter with Circe, Penelope's name isn't even mentioned. Moreover, the wording of the Wilson translation gives the troubling connotation that Circe may have been the one who was assaulted.

Hermes’ instructions to Odysseus are as follows:

"...draw your sharpened sword and rush at her as if you mean to kill her. She will be frightened of you, and will tell you to sleep with her." - Wilson

She'll be frightened of him? Hermes is encouraging Odysseus to render Circe powerless by eating the Moly plant so she can't turn him into a pig, then threaten her with a sword, which does frighten her, and then sleep with her. That line of events is disturbing. Circe is the one who offers to take Odysseus to bed, sure, but there’s a strange man in her house, she’s allegedly afraid according to Hermes, and she’s unable to resort to her usual defense and turn him into a pig as she did with the others.  Under those circumstances, sleeping with an invader is a survival tactic.

However...after Odysseus makes Circe promise to turn his men back, she bathes him and gives him food like a proper Ancient Greek host. Yet before Odysseus accepts the meal, he puts his men first, saying he can't bear to eat until he knows they're well. So Circe turns them back, then Odysseus returns to where the rest of the crew are waiting on the shore. They're all convinced their comrades are dead until Odysseus tells them what transpired and they rejoice. All except suspicious Eurylochus who calls them fools for trusting Odysseus' word based on his previous bad decisions. Odysseus thinks about cutting his head off for speaking that way. Damn, that went from zero to a hundred fast.

But Penelope's name is missing from the story.

Odysseus only thinks of leaving Circe's island when his men speak of returning to their homeland, after which he goes to Circe about the matter, and she instructs him to go to the Underworld.

"That broke my heart, and sitting on the bed I wept, and lost all will to live and see the shining sun." - Wilson

Odysseus and his men all lament the idea of sailing into the land of the dead. So his tears and despair did not start with Calypso. Also, they return to Circe's island after the journey so she can help them make sense of Tiresias' instructions.

But setting all that aside, even when Hermes instructed him on what to do, Odysseus didn't make some grand speech on how he can’t betray his wife.  He doesn’t specifically say he’s crying for Penelope on Calypso’s island.  He doesn’t mention Penelope at all, and when King Alcinous asks him about his sorrow, Odysseus tells his whole story, barely bringing up his wife or his love for her.

So is Odysseus a good guy?

In all, Odysseus is a clever character who is known for using his wits to get out of any situation.  Polyphemus, the Sirens, Scylla, he had a plan.  The idea that he’s suddenly helpless against Calypso and Circe is out of character.  They may be goddesses, but they’re not exactly the heavy hitters of the pantheon, which is why Poseidon could absolutely order a minor sea nymph to stop what she’s doing and hold a man prisoner for him. And while Odysseus spends the entire story being thwarted by the gods, one could say he also thwarts the gods right back by refusing to give up.

Like most Greek heroes, I would say Odysseus is not what we today would call a hero. But when he shares a roster with characters like this:

Zeus:  Serial rapist

Poseidon:  Serial rapist

Hades:  Kidnapped Persephone (setting aside modern interpretations she went with him willingly)

Herakles:  Raped a princess named Auge  (Yes, really.)

Theseus:  Kidnapped Helen of Sparta when she was a child because he wanted to marry a daughter of Zeus, aided and abetted his cousin in an attempt to kidnap Persephone, abandoned Ariadne, etc.

Jason the Argonaut:  Tried to abandon his wife. (I say ‘try’ because he didn’t get the chance. His wife Medea killed the other woman first.)

Hephaistos:  Raped Athena after she refused him.

Achilles:  Murdered a child to prevent a prophecy from coming true.

...Odysseus's atrocities are weirdly tame by comparison. Even the narrative where he kills the infant Prince Astyanax, modern retellings usually give that role to the lesser known Neoptolemus. More on that here.

In the end, it's not necessarily thematically important whether or not Odysseus is good or bad. The core of his character revolves around his cleverness and ability to build and strategize and make his own way in the world he lives in. Rounding this out is Emily Wilson's commentary on the symbolism behind the tree bed,

"In leaving Calypso, Odysseus chooses something that he built with his own mind and hands, rather than something given to him. Whereas Calypso longs to hide, clothe, feed, and possess him, Athena enables Odysseus to construct his own schemes out of the materials she provides." - The Odyssey, Homer, trans. by Emily Wilson, Introduction Pg 64.

So were Odysseus and Calypso lovers?

Based on the above, my opinion is 'Yes they were, but with the caveat they were problematic af.' Because problematic themes like that are pretty par for the course in Greek mythology.

[ghouldtime]

you’re the most correct and sane könig writer and I thank you so much. you characterise him so fluidly and it makes it so so good to read what you write about him. I’m praying to any and every god that paranormal investigators AU wins so we can get fucked up cryptid könig

AHHH THANK YOU SO SO MUCH 💚💚💚💚💚 I'm glad you like how I write him!

I'm aware how I write him isn't like most of the fandom but I just try to give him somewhat solid justice and keep in-character of how I see him/what we do know. I'm just never going to get behind the realllly really awful things that I hear/see most times for him. Like you do you if that's what you want to write, but I'm also going to ignore all content like that because a lot of it is just. Gross. I can't even LOOK in the tag anymore (Genuinely convinced people just are projecting their own horny desires onto him regardless of how he is which is why there's so many really nasty interpretations that just don't fit him??? Also idk who is the person who started the 6'10" rumor but genuinely I'm coming for you it's so dumb and makes 0 sense. He's tall, not THAT tall, I don't think everyone realizes how tall that is and how many issues that causes.) Can you tell I'm easily distracted IRREGARDLESS of what wins, I will happily do fucked up cryptid König. Just a matter of time

And deciding on the creature. Any suggestions are absolutely welcome, throw it at me? I'll write it.

[Minus the cannibalistic W one which I will not fully name out of respect and a similarly popular one starting with S, ending in -alker , that also belongs to Native cultures which I have 0 right to use and would feel like shit doing so. They've been really bastardized by popular culture into being a gimmicky thing instead of treating with proper seriousness and intent when it comes to the topic of them, watered down, and I'm NEVER ever ever going to write using those because it's not in my right to do so]