#i understand the process we're supposed to be doing but not the theme of the image 😭

[cinnabeat]

im looking at everyone elses projects and theyve edited images together so well and theres like clesrly a theme going on and yet?? i have nothingf

[ishomieokay]

Ok, so I just made a post about Homelander having the most tragic backstory in The Boys so I want to expand a bit on that (although literally no one asked, lmao).

Look, this isn't even about Homelander having the saddest backstory ever. Being turned into a guinea pig in order to create a super weapon is literally a cliché in superhero fiction.

The difference, methinks, is that the only character in his verse with an equally horrific origin story is Soldier Boy. But, take into account: Soldier is 1) another irredeemable villain, and 2) we're basically told he ended up in that situation because he was the most violent, petty, sexist, homophobic, fucked-up man who ever lived. Homelander was litterally just... born in the lab.

For some context, look at this guy:

Magneto has one of the saddest backstories in superhero fiction. And I'm not exaggerating here. My man literally grew up in Auschwitz. But his backstory works in a way that Homelander's doesn't because we ARE supposed to sympathize with Erik. We are supposed to understand the motivations behind his actions, even if we don't condemn them. There's also many other characters in the X-Men's universe who have gone through similar ordeals, because humans being awful and ostracizing others for being different is like, A Main Theme of the comics.

Meanwhile, Homelander's backstory seems to just be an excuse for him to be insane, scary and disturbing. The show never frames it as a reason to sympathize with him. Now, don't get me wrong. I'll be the first one to admit that Homelander's fucked up psychology allows for some pretty metal scenes, and I do enjoy them. But the fact that we're just meant to laugh at that while never really contemplating the implications of what happened to him is bafling to me.

Hey, look at that guy, he was deeply traumatized from a young age, and growing up, he was neither socialized nor given the basic tools a child needs to develop a personality or form basic human connections. Now he's super disturbed, has weird kinks and doesn't really understand how to be a human. Haha, hilarious!

What makes it even worse is that the main characters, who we are supposed to be rooting for, have stories that are for the most part unsympathetic or make no sense.

The backstory of Hughie, our main guy, is that his girlfriend died. We're off to a bad start because we hate the Dead Girlfriend Trope here. He's banging a new chick like, a week later (?) and then rarely thinks about Robin again.

We have Frenchie, a guys who kills people and it makes him sad (?), but he never really stops.

Annie and M.M. have sympathetic stories with good motivations, but they are not really expanded upon. At times, it really feels like Annie is just there to have Relationship Problems with Hughie. Which, you know, doesn't make any fucking sense because she's the face of the nation-wide political movement that opposes Homelander. By all accounts, SHE should be Homelander's nemesis, not Butcher. And instead we get a rivalry with Firecracker? Seriously?

In the first seasons, M.M was literally just There. Then, we get his backstory with Soldier Boy, but for some reason his generic Divorced Dad arc is a priority over that. Great.

With Maeve we had the potential of an amazing backstory, but again, it's not really expanded upon. It's implied that she had a dysfunctional relationship with Homelander, but we don't really know what happened. Was it consensual? Was it entirely coerced? Was it abusive? If it was, what did he do to her? How did she manage to break up with him without getting killed in the process? Like, we're missing so much context with Maeve, it's not even funny.

Then, we have A-Train, who starts off on a path to redeem himself inspired by the death of his girlfriend, whom he killed himself (?). Then he realizes that Homelander Must Be Stopped because he makes fatphobic comments (?????). He gets his brother paralyzed and kills a guy to take revenge (still unsure if that was supposed to be a heroic act, tbh). And then finally he earns his redemption by taking a guy to the hospital (?????????) and that's enough for Hughie to forgive him for KILLING HIS GIRLFRIEND. Bitch, what?? It's the worst redemption arc I've ever seen and people are literally comparing it to Zuko's. Get my man out of your mouth!!!

And finally, Butcher, a guy whose entire story and motivations are based on something that happened to someone else. Why did we ever make Becca's rape about him??? And THEN it just turns into the typical Dead Girlfriend Trope. I mean, S3 was the only time when his character arc made any sense to me because it was actually dealing with interesting themes like cycles of abuse and bad parenting, but his story in other seasons is really not It.

Literally, the only exception to all of this is Kimiko. Who is also violent and unstable, who also can't stop killing and is unapologetic about it because she is what they made her. But for some reason we're supposed to sympathize her but not with Homelander. Weird take, but ok.

Just to clarify, I'm not saying that you need to sympathize with the Nazi rapist. I'm just calling out the writers for being bad, lmao.

[holyblanchett]

Oh Agatha binding Jen was insulting on so many levels. Sasheer and Kathryn were AMAZING but the writing was pathetic. It really bothers me that Jen is a total afterthought, like Alice, gives me very White vibes off that writers room - Alice didn't get any exploration or depth until her trial and then she's dead but you can't criticise it because the whole point is that it's unfair and you're a meanie if you point out racist media patterns just like we're just bitter d*kes for pointing out the lesbophobia and misogyny. Jen though, lmao wow they really did just fucking forget her in the end like there is not even superficial closure she just flies off and Billy and Agatha don't even mention her again. And the binding- it's like they wrote it wanting a cool twist to drive home Agatha being a villain but were chickenshit about the racist implications and no "it's in Agatha's character to deflect" isn't an excuse because where's the writers discussing any of this shit in interviews? Cowards. Jen being bound by a white woman who she thought she was forming a coven with and learning to trust should've been a moment that got so much more than it did, look at Sasheer's face and she is doing all of the work to convey the horror and hurt and rage because the writing did fuck all to recognise a Black woman's pain. And it doesn't even make sense, why the hell would Agatha ever help a man abainst a witch? Why would she need money when shes at best been existing on the fringes of society and has no compunctions about stealing things? And Agatha already knew how long Jen had been bound, she has history with Jen thwt includes some other mess, she knew Jen was a midwife and considered her work important, how the fuck wouldn't she know it was her? It's so stupid. It does a disservice to both characters because casting Agatha as a racist misogynist woman which is what the last 2 episodes djd runs against her characterisation and the supposed themes of the show and the writing and fans won't grapple with it, and Jen's journey is completely glossed over and practically rewritten. We aren't going to see her deal with the trauma of this, she barely got five minutes on screen processing this horrific violent betrayal before she was conveniently zipped away, and her reclaiming her power was incredible acting but taking it back from Agatha stole some if the wind out of it - Alice and Lilia got to own their moments, they needed to believe in themselves, Jen's moment was building to that for 7 episodes and then oh actually it was Agatha who won't take the moment seriously (no shade to Kathryn, you could see how present she was for Sasheer) and Jen was really magicless the whole time.

oh!! Oh!!! We going there with the racial implications of being bound by a white woman 😭😭😭 as a person of color I hear you and understand how it looks. I think one interviewer brought it up to Jac. About how powerful that moment was of her reclaiming her power in that way. Pretty sure she said something along the lines of: "The scene wasn't written that way but she let Sasheer do her thing." Don't quote me on that but if someone finds it lemme know. I also read somewhere that Jennifer Kale will definitely be in more marvel projects because her cousin is ghost rider. So we shall see how that unfolds.

[sokkastyles]

Hi,

Hope you are doing well.

I have come across the reblogs of The Reckoning of Roku and three things hit me.

The fact that the Air Nomads believe that the world would be better if everyone was a pacifist like them feels a bit like Sozin's thought process. This one is a reach, but I feel there is a small similarity.

I didn't understand the shot at the Fire Lady thing, because we are not shown anything about the Air Nuns mentioned in this novel. Is it a shot at fans? Because if so, this is a stupid attempt.

The novel feels like a deifying of the Air Nomads. That they were these pacifist people, but come to think of it, till book 3, I doubt it was implied that the Air Nomads were pacifist, to my recollection at least. And I doubt Aang's word can be taken into account, because no twelve year old will have an understanding of his culture.

I would like your thoughts on this.

The main problem with the "the world would be better if everyone were pacifists like us" thing is that it isn't inherently wrong. The world WOULD be better if everyone worked to end violence. The problem is that the novel and the series as a whole have a very shallow view of what pacifism actually is. They seem to think it means not eating meat and having a hands off approach to violent conflicts, while what Roku calls for is actual activism and bringing peace through justice. Gyatso declaring that wars would not exist if everyone were like the Air Nomads, while simultaneously advocating for not getting involved, does reek of the same logic Sozin used when he said that the world would be better off if the Fire Nation were to spread its greatness. Neither view is actually doing anything to promote peace.

And of course that doesn't mean Gyatso is just like Sozin, and it certainly doesn't mean that what happened to the Air Nomads was justified (a view I have seen expressed by no one except Aang stans accusing Zutara shippers of saying so in entirely bad faith). But a central theme of atla is that the Fire Nation thought they were the good guys. Their entire ideology was about the belief that they were making the world a better place, and any ideology that assumes the world would be better off if these other people were more like us, while not actually addressing conflicts, is an inherently flawed ideology.

Which would be great if, as I have seen some Aang stans say, also in bad faith arguments to hate on zutara shippers for pointing out bad writing, any of this were actually intentional. But the series is not actually interested in making Gyatso or any of the Air Nomads actual human beings. We're supposed to believe Gyatso is right simply because the Air Nomads are the good guys. And that's why what he says is dangerous. Nobody is saying the Air Nomads are not the good guys here. But it is glaring that the show put these words in the mouth of a character we are supposed to idealize, when the original show explored the dangers of that idealization as one of its main themes. It's because Gyatso is a good guy and a victim of genocide that the writers making him say this is so offensive.

The fire lady mention is absolutely a dig at zutara shippers, who invented the term because of the original show's deficit in depicting the lives of women. It feels like the creators are trying to dodge any accountability for their own sexism, something they have a history of doing. And yeah, it's telling that we still know nothing about Air nuns except that, according to Gyatso, there are "good reasons" for gender segregation. It reeks of "our sacred traditions vs their backwards sexism" as well as the creators once again trying to make excuses for their own sexism.

Which doesn't make any sense from a cultural perspective, but again, the franchise is not interested in depicting the Air Nomads as real people beyond the Shangri-La stereotype they've been running with. They don't even do a good job of trying to be progressive, because that line about how Air Nomads can move temples if their understanding of their gender shifts actually raises more questions than it answers, and just gives a gender essentialist and heteronormative view on lgbtq issues.

[sailingfireshipz]

Ok, are yall ready to yap about WTF is going on with Carver!?

I first want to start off by saying I get that what Carver saw in 12x13 was extremely triggering for him, but what I don't understand is this. He goes to Texas, links up with an old fling for 6 weeks according to the time jump & brings her back to Chicago.

He completely avoids Violet & when he does talk to her, he is the one that said they should move forward as friends. Even after finding out about Tori deleting the text message, he was so quick to fall right back in with her, but he wouldn't even give Violet a chance to plead her case.

Carver decided to lie to Tori & go to Violets's party, so why is he acting like the people at 51 are all of a sudden his enemies? I'm so confused, and it doesn't make sense. Clearly, Tori is manipulating him by keeping him liquored up & dragging him out every night to keep him busy & tired. She doesn't allow Carver to sit still long enough because if he does, he'll have time to actually think/process.

What I'm trying to figure out is if Carver is hell bent on this Tori chick because he feels like Violet rejected him or is directly tied to the call from 12x13.... is it both?

I've said this a few times, but I'll say it again. The damage they are doing to Carvers' character development is baffling to me because i don't understand what the outcome of this storyline is supposed to be. Carvers' overall attitude & presence on my screen is starting to irk me because I want to feel bad for the guy but in the same breath it's hard to overlook all the shit we've already went through with him. Atp, i don't even ship Mikarver anymore because I dont want this version of Carver anywhere near Violet.

Why make Jake a series regular if the intent was to just ruin his character. He literally just got in half of the fandoms' good graces in the back half of S11/ early 12 because of this same shit.

I get the theme of the S13 is hauntings & ppl from the past but we're 6 episodes into the season & we have unearthed NO new information about Carver but we have been vividly reminded why we didn't like him in S11.

He bumped heads with Gallo, and now he's snapping at Ritter. He was getting drunk, getting into brawls & getting locked up now he's showing up to damn near every shift hungover. He was snappy with Stella in S11 & though he hasn't been out of line with her yet the fact that she had to get out of the rig when they were supposed to be responding to a call to come find him....

So like what's the wake-up call & when is it coming? Because my tolerance is starting to dwindle & if his behavior continues to spill over into the house & dynamic of Truck 81 further widening the target on Stella Kidds back with Pascal.....

Idk, am I being too hard on him? Like I said, I feel for the guy, but how much more before we can turn the page? I want the Sam Carver that was there for Gallo & Gibson. The one that showed up for his LT when Shep was outside the loft. The one that told Violet nothing bad was going to happen to him, especially on the dance floor. 🥹

[otogariado]

i am always skeptical of media where the monstrous creatures of evil are painted as irredeemable and truly inhuman because they aren't capable of thinking and feeling like humans—it's easy for it to fall into so many -isms, notably ableism and racism. it's like the age old argument against robots except make it fantasy, and to have it painted in such a cut and dry way sets off alarm bells.

but i think the way frieren (the show) handles its demons and the concept of them only being able to mimic human speech and other parts of human culture and not understand it is actually good. in that, intrinsically, frieren (the show) is about human connection. they put a lot of emphasis on human understanding as well as compassion. and i think it's fundamental that frieren (the character) is presented the way she is—an elf who is also inhuman, but is so very human in her sentience anyway. she doesn't perceive a lot of things similarly to humans because of the gap between her morality and the morality of humans, but still she is able to shift her perspective the more she interacts with people and the world around her and the more she opens up to it. when your main character is presented as an "outsider looking in" and is going through an arc of self-(re)discovery, it changes the game when you introduce demons.

at first i was heavily against demons being painted in such a frank way. it's been a while since i watched that arc when it was released, but since then i think the concept of the clones in the dungeon during the second exam in the exam arc adds more insight to it. the clones don't have actual minds, but try to perfectly recreate them instead. and now i understand and accept it. you can mimic and recreate a person from the ground up so perfectly, but it comes with the caveat of no matter how perfect your mimicry is, if it's all logic and algorithms then that's just not human. even if a person is very logical and rational in their way of thinking, people are imperfect. there's always factors that influence how we think and feel (even if we're someone who doesn't 'feel' as much as other people), "noise" that would count as human error. and that's something the demons never account for. as people have put it, how terrifying is it to recreate something without fundamentally understanding it.

and now it's very interesting how timely this theme is in frieren with regards to discussions about the (mis)use of AI and topics like AI art. it's a whole other discussion entirely, but it's really fascinating timing that these discussions kind of align. i don't believe AI is inherently "evil" (and i don't like how most people talk about it like it's a boogeyman) because ultimately it is supposed to be a tool and it depends on those who program it and wield it. but i firmly believe that AI is not meant to replace humans, because it just can't. it's meant to augment our lives for improvement but never completely replace anyone. AI art in particular can almost be related to frieren directly: AI art is generated through an algorithm. yes, AI follow decision-making algorithms and that's how it learns and comes up with outputs. but ultimately these decisions could never come close to the thought process a real human could have. an AI can mimic a pattern it sees from a certain artist, but it can never recreate the artistic vision that the original artist had that lead to that very specific decision. and people are inconsistent; it's only natural to us humans. the downfall of AI is that since it is decision-based, it has to follow a certain set of rules, and that in of itself already hinders it from ever coming close to humans. because humans are constantly changing, and people can react to an event they're re-experiencing differently than they did originally. i used to hate onions as a kid and now i love eating them. do you think demons have a concept of that in the universe of frieren?

[hamliet]

So, Harry Potter ask here:

This one might sound a bit controversial to comment on, I hope it doesn't bother you. What is your opinion about the narrative redeeming Snape, a former Death Eater (the blood supremacists guys), just because of his guilt and love for Harry’s mother. I see a lot of discussions on this topic (Snape himself is already a controversial character, so I guess it's no surprise there are so many discussions around him), remembering you I got curious to know what your thoughts on this subject.

No worries!

I see Snape as a character who is far and away the most complex character of Harry Potter. Now, HP's a fairy tale in principle, so most of its characters are not overly complex. But Snape is (and so is Dumbledore). But I think some people can have trouble processing complex characters inside fairly straightfoward, simple stories, which isn't necessarily the fault of the story.

While She Who Must Not Be Named has had a lot of "..." takes to her own works (and horrid takes elsewise), I do think she's not wrong about her statement on Snape: that he was a hero, and he was a bully, both at the same time. He just was. There's no excusing his treatment of his students. His heroism and sacrifice without any guarantee that he would be remembered as anything other than a traitor was brave.

So, not only is Snape complex, but he embodies the old adage "hurting people hurt people." His childhood is also extremely hard to read about--it sounds agonizing. Snape does grow up to bully others because he was himself bullied horribly--not just by his peers, but at home, where his father abused both him and his mother.

Another potential stumbling block for Snape's "redemption" is that it gets to the heart of what a redemption is. Is it actually a change in character? Or is it a change in how the reader perceives the character? Because technically, in universe, Snape's been redeemed since before Harry was born. It's just that our reactions to him change after the reveal in the last book. And, he was still hurting people while being a hero. (Antihero?) So, how should we feel about him?

I'm going to say that's exactly the question we're supposed to be asking, actually.

And to determine what asking that question gets us, let's look at Snape as a foil to other characters. Snape is a very good foil for Dumbledore, Harry, and Voldemort. Actually, these four all foil each other quite a bit, and it's in their foilings that we come to an understanding of the story's themes.

Like Dumbledore, Snape is somewhat morally gray. We're meant to ask the complicated questions at the end of the last book, which was all about wrestling with the legacy of heroes who turned out to be very flawed. Snape is cruel to Harry, but is ultimately determined to keep him alive no matter what because that is what Lily would have wanted. Dumbledore is loving and a good mentor to Harry, but does all of this while knowing that Harry would have to die in the end. Snape even calls Dumbledore out on this. Dumbledore also allows Harry to stay in two abusive situations--the Dursleys and Snape--for the ultimate benefit of protecting him... so he can eventually sacrifice himself.

If someone is horrible to you but ultimately determined to keep you alive no matter what, are they a worse person to you than someone who is nice to you and believes you must die, even if they are devastated by this?

This is why I really roll my eyes at people not understanding the purpose of "Albus Severus Potter" at the end. It's so dismissed and derided, but it's narratively perfect. (Especially in! A! Fairy tale!)

The names aren't about Harry and how he feels about these men. They are names that are significant symbolically for showing how Harry has reconciled these two complicated legacies, and will keep reconciling with them because their legacies are literally alive and living on (and the weight of having legacies and the question of whether you're seen as yourself is exactly what The Cursed Child explores.)

In the end, both Snape and Dumbledore achieved their goals: Harry is alive, and he died to vanquish Voldemort. All is well. Their legacies live on in a literal new life, who gets to decide for himself what his own legacy will be in TCC. Meaning, even if Harry acknowledges their flaws, he chooses to appreciate their lives. Instead of being kept in the dark, ignorant about his endgame and ignorant of his mother's history, he sees, and he gets to determine how he feels about it all. It's empowerment, not capitulation. It's maturity, embodying the macrocosm (appreciating the big picture) in the microcosm (a single person). (Also, yes, Dumbledore's "the greater good" struggles with Gindelwald tie into this idea, wherein via Snape and Dumbledore's opposite approaches/reasoning to protecting Harry, we see that the greater good vs the individual is not necessarily a dichotomy after all. So having a character literally embody both in the end is--perfect.)

Snape, Harry, and Voldemort all grew up unloved. The difference is that Harry is able to find himself surrounded by loving friends at a point. Snape is able to find one person to love. Tom Riddle isn't able to find anyone, and hence he becomes Voldemort. That shred of love inside Snape saves not just himself spiritually, but Harry physically. Because love is like that. It's the most powerful magic, after all.

As for the whole idea of showing Snape as redeemable thanks to love--I mean, listen, as someone raised in a cult, people need to realize that people inside these cults--even extremist, evil ones--need someone or something to motivate them to leave. They were a person before their joined the cult (unless you were brought up in it) and they're still a person. Giving someone ties to the outside is exactly how most of them will come to realize they have options. No, not everyone has to forgive them or be willing to extend a hand. We can't be everything to everyone. But if someone can, that doesn't mean they're excusing the inexcusable. They're just recognizing the humanity inside them. And even if no one does, the person in the cult can decide to love someone and leave. It's hopeful. It's a fairy tale, and love wins.

[larrythefloridaman]

I am not a prismdani guy in the sense that I dont think that could ever have a happy ending even in theory without altering or disrespecting their characters in some essential way and i dont think a fully tragic and fucked up ending for a character like dani with no light at the end of the tunnel really suits cpuk's tone or themes in the grand scheme of things

but i am in the sense that i understand and am compelled by it in like a horror movie way.

In a 'dear god dani get the hell out of there' way.

In a 'hey that scene in orange looked almost like a date before the arm thing, (the most flagrantly horrifying red flag yet at that point and what made most of us fully turn on her after some hesitation about fully condemning her when she gave cobalt a crisis instead of advice and shoved folk and treuse around before the Kicker that was her killing crimson onstage) that, as a flashback, was immediately preceded by Crimson (literally a walking red flag that somethings deeply wrong in Prism's metaphorical house, Noone Really Acts Like That For No Reason,) asking what Prism's been doing and saying and followed within said flashback by Quadratic (Mr. Character Arc Revolves Around Healing From A Relationship With A Character He Goes On To Explicitly Compare Prism To) carefully soft-confronting Prism so as not to make a scene while checking in with Dani to make sure shes okay and to let Prism know he has his eyes on her and isnt afraid to bluntly and unambiguously leak information to the audience she wants to keep secret while theyre on camera so she better not pull any shit' way.

In a 'the butchest girl twitter can handle without getting scared and me, the sunshiney eccentric femme she serves and obeys onesidedly like a dog, her own character subsumed into an aesthetically cute complimentary nonthreatening opposition to mine :) (dani cannot bring herself to admit shes grown afraid of setting her off or disappointing her or disobeying and being made to feel that oppressive crush of obligation as Prism manipulates her, struggling to realize and process the idea that Prism is a threat to her because an Abuser™️ (as per popular cultural portrayal) is supposed to be an obviously evil physically threatening bastard mcbadguy not a 5'0" nothing bible camp counselor that uses pressure, guilt, information control and other such tactics to creep into your thoughts to rewire your behavior to her liking if you don't have the means to reject what she imposes on you.) look at us we share a character flaw we're foils arent we charming :)' kinda way.

[rustingcat]

tagged by @inkedroplets who tagged me in a few things now, and I forgot to answer some of them. Shame on me, but thanks for the tag, darling:)

1. What sort of content do you create, and what is the thing you’ve made that you’re most proud of?

I started with art, then began writing, then started animating, and recently uploaded a fanvid 😅

I'm proud of them all because they are all part of the progress 😌

2. What fandom(s) do you create for?

Supergirl. I'm counting my Sadie/Saskia vid as supercorp.

3. What is your current favourite ship (or brotp if you prefer), and how controversial is it?

Supercorp. And apparently a lot of people don't like them because they hated supergirl? (At least according to tumblr tags in polls. But those people also accuse them of being too straight...)

4. For your answer to question 3, are they canon?

They are in my heart. Also, I feel that their last conversation was as close to canon as they could get.

5. What was your first fandom, and how old were you?

I was deep into Harry Potter for a long while in my life. That's what got me into fanfiction and tumblr. I still have a sweet spot for what it represented to me in my childhood and the stuff I took away from it despite the actions of some extreme lady.

6. What is your most unhinged fandom creation to date?

My Twilight Au fic 🤣

Was written as a parody, but somehow ended up being way too wholesome.

The power of pasta is my one crack fic, so there's also that.

7. Do you remember what started you off creating fandom content, and if so, what was it?

I was an avid consumer for years, but it was all thanks to the Supergirl fandom that I dared to try and create something. I was in the process of coming out and accepting myself for who I am, which, despite being in a very open and accepting environment and family, was really hard on me. Both the show, and especially the fandom, were what helped me not only to come out but also to see it in a positive light. It made me understand the meaning of pride, and I am forever grateful for that. That's why I decided to dedicate my time to creating stuff myself as thanks to this amazing community and to do my best to keep it active.♥️

8. Do you let people you know in real life see your fandom creations?

Some, yes. I have a few friends who know I write, but had not read any of my stuff. I have a few I share my art with, though.

9. How do you feel about fanworks of fanworks? Has anyone ever made something based on a thing you made?

Someone wrote a fic based on my art a while ago, and I'm still excited about it!

10. What feeling do you most often try to evoke with your creations?

Depends on the content. Each piece has its own purpose. I try to aim for fluff, but I've been told I accidentally write a lot of angst... oops?

11. Has someone ever paid your work a compliment (in any form) that has stuck with you, and what was it?

I'm always excited when fandom friends tell me they like my stuff. Or just anyone in general. It just warms my heart.

12. What’s your favourite thing someone else has made that you’ve seen in the last 24 hours (and link it if you can find it again!)

Have you read the most recent space log update? It's pretty cool...

13. Give a small sneak preview of something you’re working on right now (eg a couple of sentences of fic from a WIP, a gif set theme, a small piece of a larger picture, whatever you feel happy to share)

"Alex, you're saying that as if we're not literally standing at the entrance of a school for fairies." Kara said as she rested her hand on the handle of her large blue suitcase.

"Fair point."

"It is ridiculous, isn't it? Like, fairy collage, it just sounds so…"

"Bizarre?" Alex raised an eyebrow as a small chuckle escaped her lips.

Kara sheepishly nodded.

"Well, yes. Very. But that's our lives now, I suppose," Alex shrugged and shoved her hands in her jeans's pockets.

"You mean my life. You're going to badass school for ass kicking," Kara teased her sister.

Because apparently I'm not done making AUs based on questionable IPs.

And a bit of my card game AU:

Lena was the one to drag Andea to sneak out of school for a change. Only unlike her best friend, Lena didn't drag her out to a party or to drink alcohol, but instead to the local game shop where she could learn more about that mysterious game. Andrea wasn't as excited as her, but reluctantly agreed (if only to get out of trigonometry class). Fight for Justice, while being a bit too cheesy, Lena couldn't deny the strange allure of the name. She was fascinated to learn the different ways the game could change from moment to moment, the various objectives one can approach to win the game, and she couldn't help but absolutely adore the art on each and every card.

14. Have you ever seen/read anything made by the person who tagged you? If so, what was it and what was your favourite thing about it? (pick a favourite if there are several)

Rich girl with issues is a masterpiece, and you should all go read it!

15. Do you leave comments on fandom works, and if so how would you describe your comment style?

I try to always comment, and especially on stuff I like. I don't think I have a specific style tho😅

16. How many works in progress do you currently have? Will you finish them all?

I have about 12 that I actively started, but more that are in the concept phase. Ideally, I'll finish them all eventually.

17. what’s the longest it’s ever taken you to finish a fandom project?

It's been almost 2 years since I started The Art Of The Game. I'm close to the end, but it's been a while...

18. Describe the thing you made most recently in a way that is technically true, but also completely misleading. Link the thing if it’s published!

The hottest new trailer for the film we all have been waiting for;)

19. Do you ever engage with fanworks for a fandom you’re not in? Which one(s) and how did you get into it?

I feel like a foreigner when I see stuff from other fandoms, and I usually don't know enough about it to interact with it.

20. Recommend a fan work from your fandom to your followers

@awaitingrain has some really amazing artwork with adorable chibi designs! I'd recommend checking out her stuff!

Suggested tag list, but there are no rules here, follow your heart.

@eqt-95 @fazedlight @autisticlenaluthor @snowydragonscave @missluthorwillseeyounow @luthordamnvers have fun;)

[felassan]

Lately there's been quite a few interviews with the creators of Dragon Age: Absolution, some of which contain interesting pieces of information about Absolution and DA generally. This post collects these together. :> it's under a cut due to length and will be updated if more info of note from interviews comes out. all infos have their sourcelink included. this post is Part 1, it spilled over into 2 parts due to character limits (Part 2 link). (Absolution spoilers under cut)

Unreliable narrators & fluid lore ("You think you know how things work, but it's rare that you actually do, and it's rare that everything is exactly what it seems [...] it gives us opportunities to ask questions like, 'What if that didn't actually happen that way? Maybe the world isn't what people think.'"), power at a cost/power always has a cost & this can manifest socially or literally, the characters & what happens with them & how they relate, heroism being about the choices you make & what you choose to do when confronted with a problem, and what is a hero/what makes a hero are central themes of Dragon Age [source]

Pride, ego and the belief that "only I have the answers, I'm the only one who can solve this" also came up as a theme (👁️). it was said that characters who aren't willing to acknowledge when they need help often become the villains. John Epler said that that is the kind of stuff he would love to explore going forward in the series: "Where we can see that idea of people who are convinced that they are the only ones who can solve the problems versus the people who do have that ability to lean on others, that ability to take what's given to them, take what's offered, take the help that they need." [source]

They would love to do more with the characters in this sort of way: "Using Solas as an example, using Corypheus as an example, how did they get to where they were? Being able to dive into that thought process and dive into that psyche, really being able to understand where they're coming from, even if you don't agree with it, because ultimately, they are supposed to be characters, not just caricatures, not just 'big bads.' They may be big bads, but there's more to it than just that." [source]

They wanted Miriam's story to feel as epic and as dire as someone facing the end of the world, because in a lot of ways she faces the end of her world in the show. as a character she's real, imperfect, at times very vulnerable, going through hell and she was given the space to express a full range of emotions. they didn't want to worry so much about making her perfectly likeable. "we wanted this to be a chance for her to try and start to heal some of those scars". she struggles with a sense of self-worth and finding and fighting for herself [source]

Miriam is the only person who doesn't think she's the hero of the story. Hira's VA was advised to play Hira as if she was the hero. Rezaren's was advised to play Rezaren as if he was the hero, and as if he was right. Rezaren sincerely believes that he's doing the right thing because people don't wake up in the morning and think that they're doing the wrong thing and then continue on. As villains Hira and Rezaren have a lot of sympathy but not a lot of empathy. "They feel bad when people are hurt by their actions, but they can't really put other people's needs above their own or other people's needs, in Hira's case, above the importance of her cause." [source]

When it comes to sensitive or intense topics, they like to engage consultants. John said "You don't want to be like, 'Oh, we never did this,' but also you maybe want to like, 'You know what? It maybe made sense 10 years ago or however long ago, but maybe now we're not going to go quite in the same direction. Maybe we're going to put some more nuance in it or maybe take it in a slightly different way.'" [source]

Corypheus saw himself as a figure who now needed to save the world, as the hero of the story. He's the kind of character who thinks "I'm the only one who can do this, I need to do it on my own". everyone to Corypheus was a tool and a way to get to his ultimate goal. he wasn't able to admit when he was in over his head and didn't have all the answers [source]

Nessum is based on the idea of what a high-end Tevinter resort town would feel like, and on what an opulent Tevinter Versaille would look like [source]

Tevinter is (and has always been talked about internally at BW as such) very much in a lot of ways like the ancient Roman Empire - a civilization that has over time conquered other places and drawn a lot of different elements of their architecture into influencing their own. they were trying to get this across in Absolution, the idea of the old Roman style and also pulling in some of the influences of the places that they conquered. [source]

Tevinter has been a massive weight on the fabric of Thedas for a long time [source]

Regarding who would appear at the very end of the show, they explored a few different options, it wasn't always planned to be Meredith. as they were developing the show they realized they all loved to hate Meredith and that they had an opportunity to surprise fans by bringing her back. they thought she was an interesting character, she appeals to the DAII fanbase and she has a lot of unresolved business. ultimately they wanted to use a villain who was big enough to make it feel like a major part of the Dragon Age mythos, rather than just an inconsequential side story. Meredith is also the perfect candidate for a character who would want an artifact like that and be willing to make sacrifices to get it for their own goals. John said that in that meeting when that was proposed, there was a moment of "Oh, okay, wow yeah that actually is perfect" [source]

Hira's character explores the theme of giving everything to the cause and the price of this. she truly believes herself to be a True Believer of the cause and is willing to sacrifice anything for it. "To have her run up against Meredith, and have Miriam run up against Meredith" - when you think of a Dragon Age character on a righteous crusade you think about Meredith [source]

When asked how deep Meredith has her claws in Kirkwall, they said that unfortunately there isn't a lot they can see about this. John added that "but I will say, find out more at some point for sure". Kirkwall isn't a great place at any time and this development is only making it worse [source]

[Part 2 link, as the character limit was reached in this post]

[time-is-restored]

fellas that last ted lasso episode. hmm.

listen i'll be real no matter what im gonna be out here gushing abt trent crimm cause he's my special little guy and im obsessed with him, but considering the Literal Paragraphs ive been writing abt all the shit i LIKED about the show, i didn't know how else to process these Less Good emotions than by blurting it all out over like two hours (instead of doing the dishes, lmao).

tldr; s3e2 was such an emotional high point for me, since i really felt like it had something concrete + specific to say about physical violence + social/emotional violence, and how they're BOTH highly valued as masculine ideals. but the episodes since then...

it kind of feels like im watching the result of a long and bloody fight between different writers? writers who, apparently, wanted Very different things from this last season, so now we're getting this. bizarro world mish-mash of two hypothetical shows, where tone + content + themes vary WILDLY and inconsistently from episode to episode - and even scene to scene!

[cw: discussions of sexism + racism, in a doylist context, also s3e5 spoilers]

specifically, i feel really disappointed and hurt that they went that direction with shandy's arc. i understand that we're only half way through the season, and obviously anything could happen between now and then but... really? like, is there some kind of budgeting issue here? we can't afford for there to be more than three (complex, not sexy lamps) women in any given episode? is that why the second jack appears, barbara loses any depth (what happened to that lovely moment of connection with the snow globes????????), and THEN the second SHANDY goes off her head it's. jack time? apparently???? like. this would feel a lot better as a viewer if at this point the show hadn't PRIMED me for jack doing something insanely stupid + cruel for no reason except 'haha Keeley Bad At Her Job'.

like. the first thing we see of shandy fine is her pride in keeley, and genuine appreciation of her hard work and skill. she's CLEARLY not stupid, otherwise why would the rest of her introductory scene be her helping keeley out with filmmaking advice (the extras thing) AND random, life experience shit (knowing how to deal with goat shit)?? she knows her way around a set, and she doesn't make any of the footballers feel judged, even when she's clearly thrown by the clips they're providing her.

so why in the space of like, barely a few weeks, does ALL of that get thrown out the window? 'condoms for balls'??? why are we supposed to just take for granted that she's stupid + overly ambitious (other than the Fucking Obvious!) when the show put NO effort into actually setting that up???? like, if her first scene was her monstrously fucking UP the shoot for keeley, and keeley hired her on pure sympathy then like. sure. whatever. no room for bleeding hearts in business. but that ALSO sucks as a story line for ted lasso, a show that (according to its OWN press releases!) is supposed to be about kindness and human connection and breaking cycles!

it just. it hurts? in a way where its like, i don't believe even a little bit that this was what the writers were aiming for with those scenes, and it frightens me that there could be such a wide gulf between intent and result. especially when bonding about The Shandy Incident is what got keeley and jack together (which i am trying... So hard to feel positive about, because explicitly confirming keeley's bisexuality is amazing, least of all bc it makes her jokes with rebecca feel a lot less mean-spirited on the writers' parts, retroactively)... like how am i supposed to be enjoying their moments together when i feel like the show's whole premise has been betrayed???

and really? the one moment nate gets to feel good in this WHOLE season, it's bc the server at the restaurant who previously could not care if he dropped dead right in front of him showed him some affection + validation?????

like, sure, i GUESS im happy that this random excuse for an arc has lead to a slightly more sympathetic female character existing at least in the PERIPHERY of the show's main storyline, except no im fucking not? i don't care about this fucking restaurant, and even though ive been DESPERATELY trying not to hate jade (even though the writers themselves can't seem to decide if she's Literally Racist or just a depressed service worker) NATE shouldn't care about jade! the ONLY way i can see this being an actually interesting arc for nathan is if its another exploration of his inability to leave behind the things + people that have hurt him, combined with years of conditioning where he's never allowed to express being annoyed/upset at anyone (which richmond!!! contributed to!!!!!! 'if you're mad, count to ten. if that doesn't work, count again'??? cool speedrun tips for resentment ted!). like, an arc where we see that distance away from richmond hasn't helped nate as much as it's removed some of the worst triggers, so a taste of athens ends up in the same awful pit of resentment + loathing as ted did. which nate clearly hates! he doesn't LIKE being that person! he apologised to a PAINTED DOLL of ted!!!! but when he doesn't have the framework or tools or SUPPORT to do anything else...

like. where is his team? obviously im not expecting the show to start being about a bunch of football players that AREN'T from richmond but? even just a small moment of appreciation? or hell! maybe they hate him! if we could see LITERALLY ANYTHING abt the sport which nathan has dedicated his life to, and how his Actual Coaching style is positively or negatively impacted by the lessons he learned at richmond? this is a show ABOUT football!!!!!

i just. a taste of athens? again? a-fucking-gain?????

and honestly, the worst part is that i REALLY liked the little monologue that nate got to give about how important the restaurant was to him! as much as it showed that nate is still just as passionate + earnestly defensive of the things he loves, it ALSO shows that he 1. spends that energy explaining his passion to people who don't deserve it/won't care, and 2. gets attached to things that really fucking hurt him! and like. i am on my hands and KNEES for that to be the 'point' of this arc but at this point i feel like that's me being naive! but if fucking JADE from fucking ATHENS is the civilising white gf who FINALLY talks nate down from him ~ ignorant, vengeful crusade ~ against the absolute ~ matyrs ~ of goodness at afc richmond, i just. like. what are we even DOING here gang?

i don't know. it hurts that sam's gone from being an almost principal character in s2 to only getting passing lines in s3. it hurts that rebecca's off in her own world, talking to strangers, having life-changing revelations on her own, surrounded by sets we're never going to see again, where every scene she DOES get to spend w one of the richmond members feels hasty and rushed, like the episode wants to get a few characters obligatory appearances out of the way asap. it hurts that all the chekov's guns around zava's arc (jamie's resentment, ted's lack of guidance, dani being 'demoted' + colin being benched) were apparently all just blanks, to be hastily plastered over with one big long speech about... ted wanting everyone to have higher self esteem, or something?

and listen, more the fool me if another episode comes out next week that i completely adore, and i spend like five days singing its praises. im mostly writing this so i can go INTO the next ep without feeling resentful + upset! i'll be STOKED if i was wrong and all of those little details ARE actually important, and these arcs have more to them than this! but for now im just sad and annoyed :(

[letsgoooellie]

i just finished if we were villains and because everyone compares it to the secret history i feel the need to get my thoughts out about the book and how it compares in my opinion... so spoilers i guess

characters:

in iwwv the characters are definitely a lot more likeable than tsh but i feel so much less about them, like with tsh i too wanted to kill bunny, each of the characters were so real and there, at the start you saw them all as these perfect people like richard did and then as he realised who they were so did we, they all had flaws and developed characters. whereas with iwwv while we did get a good amount of character insight its so much more just told to us by oliver rather than left for us to infer from moments. like were told that meredith is beautiful but is scared that's all she seen as because of a lesson in which she is made to talk about her strengths and weaknesses and that's what she says, like you're supposed to show not tell right? also i get that part of the whole point is that they get into the characters they play to much but then they just end up feeling like the archetype character rather than a real person, i don't know if my point is coming across but yeah anyway...

story:

one of the things this book seems to be praised for (at least compared to tsh) is how its more of a mystery, we don't know what happened and we're finding out with oliver, but again i feel like tsh manages to create a mystery despite telling us in the first sentence that bunny is dead. i do like the how the story is being told to an ex police officer as like the setting and having it set out as acts and scenes was fun, im not sure i liked the formatting of speech to be honest, i get it was supposed to emulate a play but having it just mixed in with prose was jarring. i did like the openness of the ending.

themes:

another thing i found was a lack of any themes, like with tsh you immediately know what ideas it's going to present, whereas throughout iwwv i didn't really feel as though there was any underlying ideas. i can see how some people would prefer that! having something lighter and definitely easier to get through is enjoyable. it took me two days to read iwwv while it took me about a month to slowly get through tsh, but again i think that's because in general i had a lot more thoughts and needed more time to process and understand tsh and ill definitely spend more time in the future thinking about tsh and will probably reread it at some point

anyways i really enjoyed both books but tsh is, i think, my favourite book

5☆'s for the secret history

3.75☆'s for if we were villains

[greygilberti]

My main issue with flannagan is that Shirley Jacksons work is all about the perils of the nuclear family etc

And to me flannigan was like fuck that family is great

It just goes info the heart of what Jackson was saying and shits on it for no reason?

He kinda made the story more conventional and I hate that

Whatever walked there walked alone is like. Theee core of the story and to be like fuck that is shitty

Jackson isn't some hugely outdated bigoted writer who's ideas need subverting and challenging (at least not in this story. Idk about the rest of her work)

Jackson novel was about how people who don't fit are vunerable a chewed up and spat out by institutions like romance and family

And it's like flannigan didn't get that. Or idk thought yay family was a more radical take

Idk i haven't seen the show recently so I may be misremembering but I feel like the majority of the criticism was that he didn't get / ignored the really interesting thing the book was doing.

I completely understand and respect those views.

I guess to me he did adapt it and made it his own and to me he wanted there to be hope in something that is supposed to be the end all be all of one's support. I HEAR you and yes, agree that the ideals weren't exactly what Jackson had in mind when writing the book and setting the tones and ideas. But for a creator who DID change it as much as he did, I personally feel that he did his best to take the subject matter into consideration, unlike other things I've seen where they just completely disregard certain aspects.

Like, as a quick example: Theo's sexuality. He stated himself that it was important to him and Kate (Theo) to open with her in the night club hooking up with a woman to immediately recognize that part of the character whereas the 1999 movie more or less skated over. In the novel, Theo is very much hinted at being a lesbian (because of course when the book was published, things were a lot different). My point being that while he lost some aspects while filming, he tried hard to make something good. Did he succeed? That's up for debate and that's totally fine. The thing with art is that people interpret it differently. There's the possibility that we're seeing exactly what he was thinking when reading it himself. I'm not saying your analysis is wrong and that he's right for missing the mark in any way, just that he interpreted it differently

There's also the perils of the filmmaking process as a whole in the rewrites and what Netflix wanted and how the writing process actually went. I know that when they started filming they didn't have everything written out. Maybe there were other writers or the production company making changes (I do know there were several scenes cut that he didn't want to get rid of), I don't know. All we have is the final product, that's all we get to see. We don't know what got pushed, saved and cut.

It's been a few years since I've read the book and even though I remember a lot about it, the human mind is fallible and maybe I'm on the other side of you where the show is more prevalent in my mind so I'll definitely need a reread and to reexamine the show, do a side by side comparison. But thank you for pointing all of that out, I can understand your plight with him in that sense.

[I do not have an english degree and it has been years since I was in college (even more since I was in the class where we actively discussed the book itself) so there's a lot that I may misspeak on as far as themes of the book, etc. ]

Let me say this to close: separating the show from the book, in my personal opinion, the show is one of the best I have ever seen and greatly appreciate his work on it. KNOWING he did not initially come up with the ideas for the story and that he had a fuloundation to build upon, I still think he did really well. He could've done worse and not worked as hard to preserve as much of the original story as he did. (I think I made the distinction in my original post but to reiterate: I think I'm okay with a lot of it because I feel like this is a fanfic he's made of Jackson's work )

Thank you for your honest opinion, I like hearing others and why they have certain views

[wiseabsol]

Assorted TSV Season 3 Thoughts:

I feel like the ultimate twist of this last season would be if Carpenter DOESN'T die at the end of it.

I'm still not liking the chances of survival for any of our main cast members, considering the theme of this season is the legacy that we leave behind.

I'm really hoping that Paige starts having something to do that isn't a continued downward spiral. I'm sympathetic, but I also don't want her to have hit her peak in season two.

If Paige never sees Hayward and Carpenter again I will actually scream.

I'm also not sure how I feel about the sacrifice at the beginning of this most recent episode. Did it horrify me, very much so! But it feels like lately a lot of the sacrifices we've heard about/been shown are of female-presenting characters? I think the show in general usually gives us a mixed ratio, gender-wise, where human sacrifice is concerned, but it seems like for the sacrifices that we're really supposed to feel for, female-presenting tends to be how it goes. And I'm not sure I like that, because as far as I can tell, the setting doesn't have gender discrimination at play. So this might not be an example of the writers lampooning our societal problems, but a case of the sexist background radiation of our society bleeding into the writing accidentally (in that our kneejerk reaction is to consider children and women more sympathetic and tragic victims, rather than men).

Speaking of who gets picked as a sacrifice, I'm a bit surprised that race and gender haven't played a role in the selection process. That said, I would completely understand if the writers don't want to touch that with a ten-foot-pole. The focus on classism, religious discrimination, and how we treat incarcerated persons covers a lot of ground.

I also don't think we've ever seen child saints, though we know children get sacrificed. Might be another "not touching that" subject though, in addition to the voice actor pool maybe not providing a lot of options?

[stemmmm]

i got back from a week long trip so now i've had plenty of time to ruminate on things and im finally ready to see what the fuck this guy has been trying to cook

episode 7 post

ep1 ep2 ep3 ep4 ep5+6

i think i saw a drawing of this guy earlier today except he had boobs

so lion's pretty obviously supposed to be the baby from 19 years ago, right.

ay ay aY AY AY

oh bah, the way it started out as just the last word in caps for a couple lines made me think dlanor was disguised as shannon or something but nah shes just like a robot or possessed for something.

i feel like ive been told explicitly 15 times that beato was the original beatrice's daughter who kinzo believed was her reincarnated, as if this is the first time im being given this information

damn bro you look hideous

alright so we're positing that original beatrice was enough of a fascist that she stuck to mussolini even after the rest of the country gave up? ok.

alright alright alright we're talking about whether the axis were cowards based on whether or not they surrendered and how alright.

REALLY FUNNY FOR THE V/O TO STILL BE FULLY JAPANESE WHEN HE'S SUPPOSED TO BE SPEAKING ENGLISH. OH BUT "I CANNOT SPEAK ENGLISH" IS?

interesting that this beatrice is using the baby beato voice. I've been trying to get the logic of it, and the best I can figure is that its just... to differentiate? differentiate WHAT exactly, whether its between human beatrices or just the humans and the witch im not sure yet. but I miss her other voice :( the flashback we got of her earlier that I didn't mention also used this voice even though im fairly certain the original version didn't.

i get that its for plot contrivances because beatrice had to get here somehow but WHY on EARTH would someone bring their daughter on an armed military vessel in the middle of a massive war. also because i touched on it earlier i'd like to clarify, i get that the participants in war are not necessarily people who agree with any of it. and even then, your circumstances of birth and pressure from your family will put you in situations out of your control (given, thats what this whole thing has Been About). idk i dont want it to come across as i don't get what's going on or like im an idiot or something. i may also be a bit defensive because i haven't really enjoyed the reading process terribly much in a while and didn't appreciate some of the feedback i've gotten in regards to "just keep reading, you'll like it, youll understand" because i dont think its properly come across that i think i Do understand, im just squicked the fuck out by a lot of things in part 6 and so far haven't seen anything that would allegedly turn my opinion around that much. but there's still a lot left in this to go. im just. bored honestly.

REALLY funny how much "bice" comes off sounding like bitch. all my friends at home call me bitch

oh my god also hilarious. the golds in the submarine isnt it.

EVEN IF ITS A TOP SECRET BASE WHY THE FUCK DONT YOU HAVE A DOCTOR?

anybody else have to stop and hold their head for a minute every time wildly specific gun specs are listed for no reason whatsoever

anyways this fight over the gold is fun, i figured something was gonna have to happen that got everyone else off that island and left the gold, so this makes as much sense as anything. and feeling the drive to live despite it all after seeing genuine bloodshed for the first time is a little overdone but just fine.

*curb your enthusiasm theme starts playing* well at least he insisted on taking her to a doctor

ohhhhh we're confirming beato is really and for true kinzo's biological daughter *head in handssss*

PLEASE STOP PINCHING THIS MAN'S ASS!!!

oh my god, first acknowledgement that battler isn't here. i kinda figured since he's always been kinzo's mirror of sorts, he wasn't gonna be here because kinzo was alive. like there's no reason for that to be the case, but to me the logic felt sound. battler and kinzo haven't been in the same place at the same time, at least not in 1986. and it seems that will continue to be the case !!

STOP PINCHING EVERYONES ASSES

lion sucks, actually. wretched personality.

i was holding back on making a joke about how maria talks about beato the way christian billboards exclusively go on about how there's "evidence god exists" or whatever, but now she's reciting the bible word for word so i dont know what to do with my point but i have to share it now. i do like that her point seems to be that because maria doesn't have a father, she is jesus. good for you girl.

BEATOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. and with the voice! ok so definitely that's the witch's voice.

alright this whole scenario can be argued as maria having an imaginary friend about it but if that piece of candy that beato told her to keep as a souvenir and not eat is still in maria's bag, magic is fucking Real.

also beato telling maria to practice basic hygene as her witch traini-- *has a jimmy neutron style brain blast and remembers the 1 (one) shinto shrine i've visited* OH, NO THIS IS A SHINTO THING. OK HELL YEAH. more of beato the "western" witch using japanese magics. i see i see i see.

fellas i may just like witch beato

[devondespresso]

1, 25, 81, 94 for the fanfic ask game! <3

KOKO HELLOOOOOOO ad thank you so much for the ask 💕💗💖💞💝 i went a little wild and had to reign it back in a bit and its still pretty long so apologies in advance

(ask game we're talking about is here but i also have questions next to the answers)

1. do you know how you want the story to end when you start, or are you just stumbling through the figurative wilderness hoping to find a road?

for the vast majorty of my fics i think i have a pretty good idea of where its going to go, i think because i get the ideas of these cool scenes usually set in act 2 or 3 or i at least the vibe i want from the start and The Point is usually clear the second i put thought into it. currently the only exceptions are 1) this super secret (woooo~~~) ficlet im working on that came from a prompt so i had to spend like 3 or 4 days writing it to properly understand the direction i wanted to take it, and 2) the steve henderson au, which is fucking massive already and it's even bigger in my head stnzgns. that one you obviously know how it ends y'know, it aint the steve henderson au if steve doesnt become a Henderson, but for all the arcs i have along the way it took a while to properly figure out what i doing and how to do that and im just now figuring out what that looks like for the first major arc.

so tldr: usually i know, sometimes i gotta figure it out, but i do need to have it figured out before it can really take shape

25. what’s your revision or rewriting process like?

oof ok so i tried writing this and good fucking god explaining everything i do in editing took up so much space. so this is the short answer for convenience but if anyone wants a long answer im foaming at the mouth to talk about writing stjsnystn (the rest under the cut)

the majority of my process is editing and sometimes first drafts are literally unrecognizable from the final. a lot of how i edit line by line is intuitive/vibes based, and whole scenes/arcs/pacing/flow/theme etc etc is based on a really deconstructed thought process for storytelling, to put it as briefly as i can (because this is one of the parts that got really long) its about The Why of everything going into the story. Picking details or making decisions not based rigidly on formula or trends but instead whats best for the kind of story you want to tell (and then making sure to implement it in a way that actually does that in the story).

for small works i prefer to just change shit as i see it and not worry about doing focused passes through the work, but in the steve Henderson au i literally cannot its too fucking big smhdmyxyn so in that case i do passes that span like whole writing sessions just hyperfocused on this one thing. one of my favorite passes is in-character passes where i pick one person (often dustin bc hes a main character), rewatch them a ton to get in their headspace, and go back and make sure everything they say or do fits them as if they were the sole focus if the story. I'll also do passes to focus just on medical accuracy, passes for a specific character duos to keep their story progressing and consistent, passes for ideas that stay between the lines making sure they stay consistent and understanding how much information im conveying, character's specific mindsets that their arc is about and making sure they dont have any unintentional exceptions, literally if its a thing in the text i probably need to do a pass for it so i know its consistent

also more lighthearted stuff tends to need wayyyy less editing time and its a more balanced half solo half beta process. the easiest was the claudia henderson drabble because it was really just a backstory with an active scene or two all rooted in her outside persective.

also sometimes i just start from scratch halfway through, like mr crayola henderson has one previous half-complete version in my doc fhdlas tho i guess thats how drafts are supposed to work

and this is the tldr im sorry i dont want to cut it down any more just read this one its my favourite fdhaskl

81. if you could go back in time and give your younger self a piece of writing advice specific to you, what would it be?

honestly i wouldn't have much to tell them. i didn't start writing fanfic until july of last year?? something like that and i started with the steve henderson au. maybe don't write that one about the triggering thing lol.

actually wait no. id tell them its okay to abandon projects (and maybe tell them not to make some purchases dgnxngsyn) but ye i spent a while mourning projects because they felt like they ceased to exist, but i had several screenplay outlines that probably helped me a ton. in my writing and those experiences never leave me so their existence still had a purpose and value

tldr: dont write your very recent triggers silly goose, dont cry over abandoned art

94. do you prefer dialogue or description?

i definitely prefer dialogue, and with it action descriptions because i still think in movie-medium (tho i am getting better at understanding how the FUCK prose works and especially prose pacing oh my god why can't i just hold on an actors face for several seconds of silence gAAH!!). i like saying things without saying them, i like subtly building towards something body language until a snap, i looooove making blocking relevant in a medium where you're not even seeing the movement with your eyes, and i love getting into a characters head so far that each person has a different way to word something or a different detail they focus on or a certain tick that tells the other character whats in their head.

but i struggle with internal monologue sooooooo hard, its a practiced skill im actively working on to write a characters internal logic about something but still keeping it from being too on the nose about whats really going on. like i can do it but i struggle to fill page time with it because exploring ideas at least for me usually leads to the source and thats decidedly not where the characters going! its a tuesday afternoon! they're not unpacking shit they're trying to have a third coffee!! i also struggle finding the best words for the reader to feel the text, like idk man maybe im using the onelook dictionary wrong but it just does not get me what im looking for in under three looks zgnshnsyn

tldr: dialogue and blocking, good description is witchcraft

_

but yee thank you again for the ask dude!! this was so much fucking fun i fucking love talking about writing and the logic process behind everything. thanks anyone seeing this for actually reading this far 💕