#i'm not sure if i'm phrasing this the way i want to but his worldview is just. fundamentally incompatible.

[commsroom]

the "big picture" - whether that refers to some detached, calculated greater good; ruthless ambition and progress for the sake of progress; or even the dear listeners' cosmic indifference - as an antagonistic force in wolf 359 is so fascinating to me because of the way eiffel as a protagonist is set up to oppose it, just by nature of who he is. eiffel retains his humanity even under the most inhumane circumstances. his strength is in connection, and with that he's able to reach others who share his core values, but he's operating under a fundamentally different framework from the show's antagonists. he can never understand where they're coming from or be swayed by their points of view because, for better or worse, he can only see the world through a close personal lens.

it's an ideological conflict he has with all of them, but notably with hilbert: "you talk about helping people, but what about the real, live people around you? [...] that's your problem. you're so zoomed out." eiffel will never, ever see that "big picture" because he is so zoomed in. at his best, he puts things into perspective and grounds the people around him. at his worst, his perspective narrows so drastically inwards that he becomes blind to everyone and everything else. his failings are deeply, tragically human - they're personal, they're impulsive, they're self-destructive. they're selfish. no matter how much he might try to narrativize or escape from himself, he's still left with doug eiffel: "it's taken me this long to realize that running from everyone else means that you're alone with yourself." eiffel could never be convinced to harm others on purpose, but he has hurt people, and it's never been because he didn't care. the very fact that he cares so much, that he's incapable of reconciling the hurt he's caused with the things he values, is what keeps him from real growth for so long. where many of the other characters in wolf 359 will justify their cruelty in service of something they consider more important, eiffel is so caught up in vilifying himself and the fear that he's always going to harm the people he cares for without meaning to that he shuts himself off from the people who care about him and perpetuates his own self-fulfilling prophecy.

[tizeline]

I just finished binge reading everything under your separated AU tag and I have QUESTIONS!! (that mostly just stem from me being a mikey fan) Be prepared as I will ramble.

So. My #1 burning mikey question is as follows. Why does he decide to, you know, NOT eradicate all of humanity? Does he just do it because all of his family is? Ugh it’s hard to phrase this but I’m wondering if Draxum’s word means so much to him he changes his entire world view, since draxum was the person who made him believe humans are evil, if he changed his mind he must be right? If he is the very last one to change his worldview, how does he react to the person who essentially indoctrinated him into believing humans are evil just going back on his word? Would he just, idk, try to keep going by himself (proper villain arc style!) Or does he get his own little human/outside friend to convince him, like his two other brothers do? What would happen if instead of a human/outside friend to convince him humans are okay, he gets someone like say, leatherhead, who was experimented on by the earth protection force?(Since in 2012, he was experimented on by the Kraang, but I don’t see a way of that happening when they were locked away his entire life) Huzzah for conflict! or better yet, That same leatherhead convinces him humans are okay? Though that those seem out of character…. And of course maybe it would be mondo gecko, who he befriends and then finds out was human just a few months before and still views himself as such…. So many possibilities!!

speaking of other characters, do the Drax trio have any Yōkai friends? Like one Sunita, or maybe even one yoichi usagi, per chance? Though I’m pretty sure they’d be pro-human so… idk how that would work. The question still stands.

Also, seeing as you mentioned Raph starts to hang out with Leo,Donnie and April, how does mikey react to that? Would he feel abandoned or left out? (Who am I kidding of course he would but like. It does t hurt to ask!)

And seeing as he’s alone now and he’s not training all the time (I hope) this feels like a good Segway into asking: does he have as much of a love for art as in canon? What are his and Raphs interests (since we know Leo’s!)

thanks! I love ur work and ur art and ur Au and ur mother for creating you.

P.s. I had another question I wanted to ask but I can’t for the life of me remember what it was rn so you can expect more asks from me in the near future ;)

Hoo boy, long asks mean long answers, strap in folks!

So EXACTLY what causes Mikey to change his mind on everything is something I'm still working out the details of. Draxum definitely plays a part in it, considering how much faith Mikey has in his dad, Draxum of all people changing his mind would be one of the biggest reasons for Mikey to also second guess himself. It's not like he'd instantly change his entire worldview though, after Draxum gives up on the Evil Plan, Mikey, or rather Dr. Positive, tries to motivate him to come up with a new plan for a short while. He gives up after Draxum makes it clear that they're Done™ with that, and Mikey isn't very keen on trying to do the Evil Plan all on his own considering HIS ENTIRE FAMILY decided to just give up on it. That doesn't mean he'll suddenly start liking humans, he still thinks they suck ass, he just isn't actively trying to cause their downfall anymore.

For both Leo and Raph, a big reason why they changed their minds on humanity was because they interacted with humanity and learned how wrong many of their previously held assumptions about them were. It makes sense that that's the catalyst for both of their redemption-arcs, and in that sense it also makes sense for Mikey to unlearn his prejudices against humans by interacting with them. HOWEVER! You bring up an interesting point, for Mikey specifically it would probably be more effective for another yōkai/mutant to give him a new perspective considering he'd be a lot more willing to listen to them rather than a human. I haven't been planning on including Leatherhead or Mondo, but it would be fun idea so I might do so.?That being said, getting to actually know a human later on would still be a good learning-experience for Mikey, I'm kinda tempted to bring in Woody from the IDW comics into the story too, for example.

So then we get to the topic of friends! Despite The Drax Bros growing up in yōkai society, they're still a bit isolated. They can go and hang out in The Hidden City basically whenever they want (as soon as they're old enough to do so), but when it comes to actually getting close to other yōkai and forming proper friendships...? So first of all, Draxum has a Reputation™ amongst yōkai, he's a well known figure and a lot of people are honestly a bit intimidated by him. Most yōkai thinks it's best to just stay out of his way, which includes staying out of the way of his weird kids. Basically, the bros' association with Draxum has a tendency to get in the way of them actually befriending anyone :/ Not just that, but while there are certainly yōkai who don't have the most positive feelings about humans, the Draxum family's stance on humanity is very extreme, which even most "human-critical" yōkai will find off-putting.

All of this is to say that no, they don't have a lot of friends haha. Leo hangs out at Run Of The Mill all the time, and Hueso definitely has a soft spot for him, but at most he's only acquainted with the other employees and regulars there. I'd imagine that includes Sunita, considering her dad works there and as such they've interacted on occasion. But again, Leo's extreme view on humanity makes most people uncomfortable and as such they'll mostly indulge him in civil small-talk to avoid getting on Draxum's bad side. Raph and Mikey...? They might have some casual friendly connections with some yōkai in The Hidden City, especially Mikey can be quite sociable if he can keep himself from ranting about humans for two seconds lmao. But for the most part, honestly, I think The Drax Bros are content staying a bit closed off from others outside their family. The three of them are very close and they know they can trust each other, that last part's important considering their Big Plans aren't exactly.... legal.... and as such they need to remain secretive about everything to others. I feel like they'd mostly start bothering finding new friends after they decide to abandon their Destroy All Humans Plan.

(Sidenote, I really like when Usagi shows up in TMNT stories, but I've never consumed any Usagi media myself. Almost all I know about both Miyamoto and Yuichi I know through TMNT and as such I don't feel confident enough in my knowledge about the Usagis to include either of them in the story. I HAVE been planning on reading the comics, so maybe I'll include him at a later date??)

But OH BOY Mikey's reaction to Leo and Raph starting to hang out with Donnie and April?? :D Both of Mikey's older brothers ditching him to hang out with their new little brother and his annoying human friend??? :D OH BOY YOU HAVE NO IDEA! :D

Listen, look at this from Mikey's perspective: You finally find your Long Lost Brother™ after thirteen years of him being presumed dead, great! Small problem, he's been brainwashed by the evil humans who kidnapped him and now thinks YOU'RE evil for some reason? No matter! He just needs some time to adjust! So you're patient with him, you show him kindness and understanding while gently trying to guide him back to the good side, to his REAL family. You do EVERYTHING right, and how does that bastard repay you?? HE instead turn your brothers against YOU! He ruins your plans of saving the world! Everything was PERFECT before HE showed up and started complicating things, and now your family is BROKEN and everything sucks! And it can all be blamed on Donnie.

...Hate is a very strong feeling, I don't feel like Mikey is really capable of feeling something like that, at the very least not against someone he does still technically considers family. Rather, I think the best way to describe the feeling Mikey is about to start feeling about Donnie would be bitterness. Mikey takes all the negative feelings, all the hurt and confusion about the situation he's ended up in and directs it all at Donnie. Because it all comes back to him, doesn't it? It was only after Donnie got reunited with them that things started going wrong. And from Mikey's point of view, Donnie has basically stolen Mikey's brothers from him. Needless to say, Mikey is dealing with a lot of negative emotions that he doesn't really know how to cope with them aside from taking it out on Donnie.

Donnie, who is so used to being love-bombed by Mikey is VERY flabbergasted over him basically just completely flipping a switch overnight. Mikey will just be glaring at Donnie like he's trying to explode him with his mind and Donnie's just "???who are you and what have you done with Mikey???". He starts acting really hostile towards Leo and Raph as well, it's all very weird!

Back to me not having figured out the details of the entirety of Mikey's character arc, one thing I'm contemplating is how long I wanna drag it out for. For example, I know I want to change up the events of the movie at least a bit in the AU for the sake of novelty. One way of doing that could potentially be for it to focus not on Leo's and Raph's ever growing tension in their relationship, but rather focus on Donnie's and Mikey's relationship? It'd be extra interesting if Mikey hadn't at least completely gotten over his hang-ups about humans when we bring Casey Jr into the situation. CJ looks at Mikey and sees a younger version of the man that was basically an uncle to him, like family, and Mikey looks at CJ and is just like "ew. human." and that'd be a whole dilemma to deal with. But as interesting as that could be, I'm scared that it'd just get tedious if Mikey is stuck in angst-mode for too long. We still have the entirety of season two to get through before we get to the movie, it's gonna be a while is what I'm saying. Then again, character growth takes time, maybe Mikey reconciles with his own family and starts the path to befriending Donnie by the end of season two, but they run into some roadblocks along the way. They ARE very different people, even in canon, I'd imagine it might take some time for them to properly befriend each other.

But next question - Mikey and Raph's interests! Mikey already likes to draw, but he'd definitely start doing it way more after the season 1 finale (oh wow, a healthy coping mechanism, imagine that!) Raph... Raph likes training. Even after it becomes clear that they're not doing their Big World Domination Plan anymore and as such don't really need to train as much, he still does it just because he genuinely enjoys it. He becomes proper friends with Casey the season one finale and she also really likes training, so it becomes a bonding experience for them. Leo and Donnie later on also introduces him to human media like Jupiter Jim and the Lou Jitsu movies and he gets really into it too XD Nerds!!

... Oh man, I think that's everything! Anyway, thank you, I'm glad you're enjoying the AU so much :D

[rozaceous]

tcba epilogue, hakumari snippet

i love sasuke but he's given no quarter here, i'm so sorry lmao

Sasuke comes to claim his daughter, rolls his eyes at them after reassuring them that the other two girls are kept busy and won’t be running out to bother them, and wanders back towards the house, leaving Haku with Mariko on the dock of the pond.

Haku has never disliked Sasuke, but the past several years have given him a distinct appreciation for the man, and they’ve become something like friends. Things like this just cement Haku’s judgment.

Even if he had been enjoying holding a sleeping Ayase.

Mariko notices, naturally.

“She’ll be awake again in a couple hours and screaming for food, and will be appropriately cuddly after,” she says, grinning.

Haku clears his throat. “I wouldn’t want to impose.”

“What impose?” Mariko returns with an unconcerned flap of her hand. She leans back against him until she’s fully reclined, one knee bent and her head rested on his thigh, looking up at him. “You’re welcome here, if that wasn’t clear, and Sasuke might like holding babies more than anyone else I’ve ever met, but it’s not like getting a break from doing so for a few days is a hardship.” Her eyes narrow, though her easy smile doesn’t fade. “Didn’t know you liked holding babies so much, though.”

Haku tucks a piece of hair behind her ear, huffing a laugh. “They have universal charm, I should think. Also, they’re yours, how could I dislike them?”

“Easier than you might think,” she says wryly. She looks at him more deeply, gaze gone assessing, but the moment is so utterly without tension that Haku doesn’t think anything of it until she continues, “Asking super bluntly and kinda out of nowhere, so feel free to take your time answering, but are children something you want?”

The hand he’d had resting on her ribs goes momentarily tense before he catches himself. He’s not sure how he’s meant to take such a question.

“Are you—Mariko? What are you saying?”

“Do you want kids? A kid. With me.”

“With—” Haku doesn’t know how to properly consider the concept. “You have a family, Mariko,” he says slowly, carefully. “You and Sasuke.”

“Sasuke is my family and we have children together,” she agrees. “But I love you and am probably going to keep loving you for the rest of my life, and we have a relationship together, and if you want that relationship to include children, it can. At least, as far as I’m concerned.”

From the way her eyes dart momentarily to the side, Haku interprets the ‘as far as I’m concerned’ as her personal insecurity regarding whatever reservations he might hypothetically have to having children together, rather than Sasuke taking issue. Still, to be clear—

“Is this something you’ve discussed with Sasuke?”

Mariko makes a half-scowl. “Sasuke gets to tell me what to do with my uterus approximately never. I do whatever I want and he can fucking bite me if he doesn’t like it.” But her sudden vitriol subsides immediately. “That’s to say, no, we haven’t talked about it, because I haven’t given it much serious thought before now, but I really don’t think he’d mind. We’re already so deviated from the norm, what’s one more thing? Plus, he’d get to hold more babies, I really don’t think he’d care if the baby was his? Or we wouldn’t have Yasumi.”

‘Deviated from the norm’ is correct; Haku hasn’t forgotten the apparently spontaneous adoption of Sasuke and Mariko’s first child, as at the time it’d felt like taking a lightning jutsu to his worldview, which had categorized the pair as deeply entwined but not at all romantic. Their subsequent genetic children of Kouka and Ayase was a further, though expected, blow to that view, but Haku had—resigned himself isn’t the right phrasing. His relationship with Mariko has always been fraught in some way or another; they were never going to be able to have a straightforward romance ending in marriage and a shared household. Haku has, thus, always been determined to make the most of what he does have with Mariko. He’s not interested in others; his interest is singular, and he can’t imagine anyone else commanding that interest to the same degree. His and Mariko’s circumstances and choices have simply precluded them from consistent closeness.

But this is—Haku has taken Sasuke as a particularly unjealous lover all this time. Yet surely no lover is so unjealous as to welcome another man’s children? But then why does Mariko seem so confident in her assessment?

Moreover, while Haku agrees that Mariko is the only person to determine her own actions and bodily autonomy—and woe betide the person who thought to tell her otherwise, indeed—it’s one thing to say that she does as she pleases, and another to willfully and incontrovertibly upset the dynamic of an established family and partnership.

And there are so many other considerations. Where would the child grow up? Haku has a hard time leaving Mist even for these few weeks, but the new, sudden thought of being estranged from his own child is less tolerable than even the distance between he and Mariko. But would he really have them raised in Mist, and become shinobi, part of the very system Mariko has worked to eradicate? And would he want to chance passing down his bloodline when he’s the last holder of the Ice Release? Could he put that burden on a child? Certainly, too, they wouldn’t have the Yuki name since he’d never taken it up himself, but it’s almost comically ridiculous to imagine a child of his bearing the name Uchiha. Yet how could they have a sense of ancestry and belonging without it?

Mariko presses a finger between his eyebrows; he realizes he’s started to frown.

“Not that you shouldn’t think hard about it,” she says gently, “but there’s no rush. Take your time. We’ll figure it out, however and whatever we want.”

The rush of affection he feels in response isn’t surprising, just an affirmation of his choices. Haku clasps her hand.

Mariko turns more humorous, her usual method of lightening a too-heavy mood. “I’m not doing another pregnancy for another year at earliest. Probably two or three years would be better, since I actually think I had Kouka and Ayase too close together. Like, between iryouninjutsu and basically turkey basting myself, physically I’ve done fantastic with such a short turnaround, but another baby too soon is too many babies being babies or toddlers at the same time and I do not have the stamina—”

She continues in this vein for another minute or so before Haku voices a lingering point of confusion.

“Turkey basted yourself?”

Mariko freezes. “Um. So like, I’m fine with you knowing, but maybe don’t say anything to anyone else, but, uh. Sasuke and I didn’t conceive Kouka and Ayase in the, uh, usual manner.”

Haku thinks forebodingly of her senpai’s history with human experimentation. “Mariko—”

“I just mean we didn’t have sex!” she blurts out in a panic, no doubt correctly reading whatever is in his expression. “It’s not anything freaky like I can tell you’re thinking! I worded that so bad, I’m sorry!”

Haku blinks. “You…didn’t have sex?”

Mariko gives him a put-upon look. He mercilessly waits for an answer.

“He ejaculated into a cup and I shoved the semen up my vag,” she says bluntly. “I knew I was ovulating so the egg fertilized both times, no need for a redo, but yeah. No sex.”

He tries to wrap his mind around this information. “Were you…having difficulty conceiving?”

He can’t really believe that’s the case. Mariko has enough skill as an iryouninja, and enough know-how, to facilitate a pregnancy without resorting to—this.

Mariko’s eyes narrow, then widen. “Haku,” she says, in the tone of someone who’s about to forcibly shift another’s paradigms, “Sasuke and I don’t have sex. At all. I’m sorry I let you assume otherwise, but it never seemed like it mattered to you? And everyone thinks we’re having sex, and we just never bother to correct them because it’s not anyone else’s business what we do or don’t do, and so I don’t even think to correct anyone. But I should’ve—” she clears her throat “—I should’ve told you. Explicitly. Before now. I’m really sorry. I honestly thought you didn’t care, but I guess that sounds like a poor excuse now that I’m saying it out loud.”

Haku looks down at their joined hands, which Mariko’s lightly squeezed. He thinks his entire brain has slowed. He feels rather like he did the time that he stayed awake for three days straight following a mudslide two years ago, too direly needed during the emergency to have time to sleep until he’d gotten so dazed that his sentences had ceased to cohere.

“You’ve never had sex with Sasuke?” he asks, slow, because even in interrogative form the words don’t seem right.

Mariko bites her lip. Haku stares.

“You can never tell,” she says finally, intensely. “Ever. You can’t even let on that you might suspect. But I haven’t said anything this whole time and now that I have the opportunity to tell someone, I think I’m going to explode if I don’t, holy shit. So.” Mariko’s eyes shift around, and Haku even feels the brush of jutsu as she ascertains that no one is within listening distance. “Look, in general, Sasuke’s feelings about sex can be summed up as ‘gross’ and ‘for other people,’ but it’s not like he doesn’t know that we’ve had sex. And if Sasuke was curious enough to give it a go, I was hardly going to say no, I love the guy and my eyes work, okay? So the one time Sasuke and I tried to have sex—well, I already used the word tried. Please understand what I’m saying.”

[gffa]

hi! i’m not really sure how to phrase my question, but it’s meant in good faith because i’m genuinely curious; what is it about obikin that you like so much? a fellow star wars fan i’ve been chatting with (who i. probably won’t be anymore after the conversation that prompted this because it was uhhh Intense) kinda jumped down my throat when it was brought up? in a “how could you not like this” way, even though all i said was that my opinion on the ship itself is neutral leaning towards uncomfortable. and when i asked them what they like about the ship, they didn’t really give a concrete answer? just that it’s the best star wars ship. but it got me wondering why other people like obikin, and you’re one of the people i feel more comfortable asking. so here i am. thanks in advance, and thank you for the lovely blog you run!

��🌻

Hi! I'm sorry that you're going through that, friends have to be able to accept that they're not always going to share everything and be able to respect each others' boundaries, that you may never like it and that's okay, that they do like it and that's okay, and if it comes down to it, that you both just find other things to talk about if you don't see eye to eye. As for what I like about Obikin, there's always just going to be a degree of, "Well, because I just do." to it, like why do some people like pizza? Why do some people like cheeseburgers?  They just do, something in there lights their brain up and they love it.  I say this ahead of time because it’s okay that sometimes we just don’t like a thing, no matter how well or poorly it’s done, like I will just never really be into westerns, doesn’t matter how good they are or bad they are, how much someone articulates what they find fascinating, they just don’t light my brain up. That said, what I like about Obikin is the complicated history they have and the push-and-pull of their different worldviews and how they each tug the other towards the center. For Anakin, he wants to love people with everything he has, he wants to possess them, he wants his feelings to consume him and the one he loves.  For Obi-Wan, he wants to find inner balance and peace, he wants to have his thoughts be clear because that helps him not fall prey to his feelings, and as a psychic space wizard who could really hurt people if his feelings overtook him (because their connection to the Force is their emotions), that’s one of the most important things in his life. But they love each other.  Whatever form that love takes, they each pull each other towards the middle between them.  Obi-Wan can help guide and structure Anakin, he can turn Anakin towards not letting his feelings eat him alive.  Anakin pulls Obi-Wan towards letting his feelings overtake common sense, and that may not always be a good thing, that if push came to shove, Obi-Wan might not be able to stop Anakin from killing a thousand people if it meant killing Anakin, too.  But it sure is a tasty as hell dynamic to play with, as a writer and reader! My love of Obikin is wrapped up in how I see the characters--that Obi-Wan is a patient and kind man who cares deeply about Anakin, who seeks him out in the source material to offer to talk to him, but doesn’t push because he respects Anakin’s boundaries, while Anakin is someone who wants those boundaries pushed, he tries so desperately to be in control and the rock others lean on, but he’s so bad at it and he’s constantly looking for someone to follow.  Look at the way he keeps offering the galaxy to others--he offers it to Luke in ESB, he offers it to Padme in ROTS, he follows Sidious for decades until he can find someone else to follow, that guy wants a benevolent hand on the back of his neck so bad.  He wants someone to soothe him and his upset feelings so bad.  He wants someone to make his troubles go away so bad.  And if Obi-Wan would realize just how badly cracked Anakin’s foundation is and how badly he wants that hand on the back of his neck, then I can see him stepping up into that role for Anakin’s sake, even enjoying that role for his own sake as well. And part of that is just that it’s really hot, I love a good mild-to-mid-range d/s dynamic that they both get something out of, I love when it’s paired with Obi-Wan’s dedication to helping teach Anakin, that everything he does in that relationship is to better help Anakin to a good place. I further love Obikin because I love their banter, they bicker back and forth, pulling each other up out of a funk, like at the beginning of Attack of the Clones, Anakin is a hot and sweaty mess, so Obi-Wan starts teasing him and a few minutes later, they’re laughing together.  Or on Vanqor when they’re stuck in the cave with the rancor, bickering with each other, that is the funniest thing I’ve ever seen.  Or when they’re trolling Dooku together on Felucia, that was also hilarious. Or the beginning of Revenge of the Sith, where they’re bickering the entire time and it is such a great Old Married Couple dynamic, the kind where you’re so ridiculously fond of this person even as you’re crabbing to their face or laughing in their direction, they’re the person you wouldn’t leave behind, they’re the person you can’t bring yourself to kill because you love them too much, because they’re the person that’s shaped your life just as much as you’ve shaped theirs. Or they can be a Battle Couple dynamic, look at how they fight side by side, moving together in sync, like they’re two halves of the same whole.  The opening scene of ROTS was literally designed to show their ships swooping together as an extension of how close they were, how perfectly they moved together, how well they got alone.  Or look at them fighting Ventress together, they’re inseparable.  Or fighting Dooku on Obi-Diah, that spinning move they do or the way Obi-Wan is like, “I’ll give you a push!” to send Anakin flying was flawless, those two practically shared a single mind! It’s a combination of a lot of things--Anakin being a subby brat who tried to pretend he wasn’t but very much wanted that, the depth of their relationship and how much they’ve been through together, the way neither of them could ever really let the other go even when the entire weight of the galaxy and the weight of every child Anakin killed was between them, their banter was very “couple who has been married for 50 years”, they intimately understood each other and moved together like they were two halves fitting together, that they can either be terrible together or amazing together, there’s an epicness to them that lights my brain up, etc. It’s a dozen different reasons all wrapped up together that lends itself to soft moments, hard moments, complicated moments, sexy moments, funny moments, their relationship is complex enough and thorny enough that I can either wrap myself up in it like a soothing blanket or I can dissect it like it’s got a hundred layers deep “what the fuck is wrong with these two, it’s fascinating” dynamic. But, for me, I love how much they’ve been through together, I love the banter, and I love that Anakin Skywalker’s brain is full of too many thoughts and feelings and the person best suited to fuck the noise out of his head is Obi-Wan Kenobi, who is a teacher down to his very bones, who is someone who is relentless at caring about what’s best for others, who has his own complicated emotions and reactions, but will always care so much about Anakin that he’ll find a way to help him, if Anakin will accept it.  And I tend to think the best way to do that is to rail the noisy, ugly thoughts out of Anakin Skywalker’s head, until he’s too stuffed full of other things to have room for anything else. I feel like I’ve only scratched the surface here, so I’ll throw it out to anyone else who wants to answer, too!  I’d love to have more examples and just to read them for myself!  It’s totally okay that some aren’t going to ever be convinced, maybe all of the things I listed above just do nothing for you or you don’t see their dynamic that way, and that’s okay! Why do you guys ship Obikin?

[wistfulcynic]

gonna go off a bit on the subject of the "he's me fr" school of character analysis. Because while it's absolutely fine and good even to relate to fictional characters and see aspects of yourself in them, it's also important to recognise the difference between your interpretation based on your experiences and what is actually shown on the page or screen.

humans are primed to recognise patterns. We are strongly inclined to contextualise things to suit our existing worldviews. We don't like contradiction and we don't like things we don't understand. It's so natural for us then to reframe anything we find confusing or contradictory that we often don't even notice we are doing it.

this is bad! This is dangerous! This is how you get bigotry and hatred!

a lot of people reframe things they don't understand (other races, cultures, religions, genders) into Other and Other is frequently Bad or even Evil. It's relatively easy to spot when other people do this and to understand that it is wrong. But surely, you may then say to yourself, if i am reframing things into what is familiar to me that's good, right? i'm Relating and that's a positive thing!

and i guess, yes and no. Yes because finding connection can be validating and because there's a reason that representation in media is so important--that reason being largely because it gives a wider range of people the opportunity to see others like them on screens and in pages. But also that act of relating to something you know is in fact an act of bias. You are biased in favour of recognising that thing because it is You. It's important to you as part of your identity but you should be aware that this can lead you to overcompensate and to misinterpret things because you are seeking that connection so intensely. And honestly i think this is also fine so long as you are able to recognise the difference.

there's a difference between saying "i identify in X way and demonstrate Y characteristic. This fictional character demonstrates Y characteristic therefore i am going to interpret them as identifying in X way" and saying "this character MUST OBVIOUSLY identify in X way because I DO and I SAID SO and this is now a VALID TEXTUAL INTERPRETATION."

maybe it is. Maybe it also isn't. Maybe Y characteristic is something that supports many different interpretations and "because they're totally me and i said so" is neither a strong argument nor a healthy way to process the world.

let me give a real world example. i am acespec, something i didn't understand until relatively recently and definitely couldn't have defined when i was in college because that was like 1997 and the language i needed really didn't exist then. Or at least it didn't exist in my corner of the american midwest. Anyway. i had a friend in college who was gay. He had come out at 18, which in the late 90s rural midwest was a big fucking deal. He was very proud of his identity, to the point of being aggressive about it and one of his big things was trying to encourage other people to explore their own sexual identities.

which is fine, right? Good, even. People should be able to do that and his intention was to be a safe space for his friends. His intentions were good! What wasn't good was the way he absolutely targeted me as someone who didn't date and didn't "chase men" <-this was literally the way he phrased it to me. He said "you don't chase men and you don't want to date them therefore you are a lesbian just admit it."

he absolutely would not accept that i wasn't gay too. He used to get mad at me for arguing with him about it. The way his world was framed you were either gay or straight (reminding folks this was the 90s) and so if you weren't demonstrating Accepted Straight Behaviour, ie dating and lots of sex, that must mean you were closeted gay and should just come out already, otherwise what are you some sort of homophobe?

he wasn't able to recognise that his interpretation of the characteristics i showed were not the only possible interpretation. Even if i weren't acespec i could just not have met anyone i was interested in! (this was also true). There were at least half a dozen other explanations for it but he insisted his was the only way because it was His identity and His experience and he was i think genuinely trying to relate to me on that level. Instead he ended up alienating me because i knew the choice wasn't as simple as "gay or closeted and probably homophobic" but there was absolutely no convincing him of that.

obviously there is a difference between what he did and fictional character analysis. Obviously fictional characters are not going to be hurt by people interpreting them as whatever the way i was hurt by my friend's behaviour. But i put it to you that the same inability to differentiate between what is real and what is your own interpretation based on your personal biases is a negative thing and something people need to be aware of. If you are capable of imposing traits on fictional people based on your own identity and recognising that doesn't necessarily mean they have those traits then great, more power to you, go forth and fanfic. But if you interpret a character in X way and genuinely, deeply believe that your interpretation is the only right and valid one based on nothing more than your own experiences then i strongly urge you to examine your biases and learn to do textual character analysis. For yourself, for your own metacognition skills, but also for the people around you. Believing you are right and there is no other way to think is the quickest path to intolerance and hatred that there is.

[manytoonepoet13]

HERE. AND. NOW. As a proud MEROLD and CIELOMORT stan. Why do you guys love to villainize these two??? ESPECIALLY CIELOMORT I genuinely do not see why they would have some sort of villainous intent.

Merold might be impure, yes. He lies through his teeth just to get what he wants. But what does he want? His lord's happiness. For no one to ever cross My Melody. And yes. I am aware how Your Melody is inspired by Little Red Riding Hood...

“Quote from 4games: While it matches the worldview of "Fragmem", there is also a way of depicting it from a different perspective. I thought that the Lord is "My Melody" and the title of this song is "Your Melody" was very tasteful. Conversely, I would like to hear how the song was created. Murakami: In terms of the lyrics, first of all, there is the choice of words that are inspired by the motif of "Little Red Riding Hood" that you just mentioned. "Whisper" is also an expression that means "don't be fooled by what the wolf says". Also, the repeated phrase "why" in the latter half is a phrase that comes from "Little Red Riding Hood", such as "why are grandma's ears so big" and "why is her mouth so big". We will be depicting what kind of person Merold is in the voice drama, but I wanted to make this song meaningful by releasing it before we know that. I'm sure that the listener's feelings will change as the story progresses.”

While I do agree that the expression that is "whisper" may be suspicious on it's own. If you look at the bigger picture, you may see that the wolf isn't representing Merold, but I'd say his fixation. I believe so because such expression was used in these lyrics:

“The fairytale of that day you told me about... The pleasantly soft and sweet whispers, Just listen to them carefully, don't get flustered now.”

To which was then followed by the line:

“It'd okay to be deceived with an outright lie... because within it lingers a quiet love.”

Further emphasizing the point that he's doing what's to be considered bad things, but for the greater good.

And Cielomort's the same. I would even go as far as to say the reason why he may be acting suspicious is what I like to call my Vessel Theory where Cielomort wants to utilize his body to be a vessel for all the negativity, and the essence of everything each kingdom loves in order to lure the SEEDS to him, therefore allowing him to eradicate all of them at once.

Hints of his impending sacrifice is scattered throughout Aozora no Memory, particularly showing in lines such as:

“Look, for you, I'll become the blue sky.” “I wish to share it all with you, it would be nice if I could be within that “everything”. But it's alright if your sky continues to remain blue.” “Even though things may change during these dizzying days... Leave only your smiles, for I will tuck away your loneliness into those clouds.”

(DOES THAT SOUND LIKE A VILLAIN PLANNING A CONTINUOUS SPREE OF SENDING PEOPLE SIX FEET BELOW???)

Though they don't have villainous attempt (as of now or most probably ever) I can indeed say what they're doing is not good; to deprive the people of truth is akin to a body without a soul.

Even though I'm quite set with this idea, I do want to read your thoughts. Maybe I might change.

But the only thing I'm suspicious of Cielomort is his descent six feet below...

[jingerpi]

Hi, I'm sorry to bother you and I'm not sure if this is the kind of question that you normally get, but I am very new to socialism and was introduced to it by my older sister who's a Marxist Leninist Maoist. My understanding of it mostly comes from her explanations but I've also read some works (not really theory, 'The Great Towns' by Engles for example). To me, from what I know, it seems a much better system than capitalism and I generally agree with what my sister's told me about it and what I've seen online from accounts like yours. I would like to read more but I'm not sure where to begin. I am also disabled and one of the ways it affects me is that I get quite severe mental fatigue and so can't concentrate on texts for a large period of time. Do you recommend any 'entry' texts for beginners that teach how to use the tools of analysis? How did you first get into Marxism and what reading would you recommend? I'm hesitant to buy any modern interpretations of it because I'm not sure which sources are genuine or which are imperialist interpretations of it. I'm sorry if this sounds strange; I'm not sure how to phrase it.

Thank you anyway and I hope you have a wonderful day!

hi hi! Firstly, this isn't a bother and this type of question is lovely

Secondly, I got into marxism when I left my family's religion and began digging into scientific worldviews. I made some friends who had similar experiences and many of them were varying flavors of leftist, I eventually started digging into theory proper and it really resonated with me in a way liberal political science never has.

third, as for recommendations, here are a few! Principles of Communism - Engels This work is very beginner friendly. Its a Q&A about communism from Marx and Engels time. Its useful because of the information it contains, but its also a helpful introduction to the language that a lot of theorists use. its not long and you can read a given question and corresponding answer at whatever pace you want. Theres around 20 questions with only a handful of sentences each, so its not bad at all in my experience.

Where Do Correct Ideas Come from? - Mao This one is extremely short, only really one paragraph. You can skip it if you'd like, but if you find theory hard to get into this one can be a helpful primer for the epistemology (theory of knowledge) that most marxist works use.

For a more in-depth, but still short look into Marxist philosophy, I can recommend Dialectical and Historical Materialism by Stalin. This work is my go-to for the topic. It is a bit denser than the above works but it is a very rewarding study. I've read it many times and developped my understanding further each time, so don't worry if it doesn't click Immediately, this isn't fiction so it will take some time to digest, thats normal. Two works which pair well with the above are On Practice and On Contradiction, both by Mao. The first gets into the relationship between knowledge and practice, it elaborates on Where Do Correct Ideas Come from, and also offers some helpful guides for how to change things. The second is a good compain to Dialectical and Historical Materialism, elaborating on it by another author, A lot of people prefer Mao's writing style, so you can gain another perspective on Dialectics. If you're up for trying a book, a good introduction to the politics of Marxism is State and Revolution by Lenin. This work answers most of the common questions about revolutionary marxism, its positions on the state and where that differs from other ideologies. Its split up into chapters and sections within each chapter, so you can take it at your own pace. It took me a long time from first picking up this work to finishing it, so don't worry if you need to take it slow

I would also highly recommend supplimenting theory with other activities. It sounds like you're already participating in those to some degree, so thats wonderful, but just to clarify: Finding discussion groups and communities which talk about marxism is extremely valuable. Whether its a book club or just some friends to discuss with - Marxism is a communal ideology and it is best underestood socially, so discuss with others as much as you can. If nothing else, feel free to send me asks about the above works (or anything else, really)

There are also plenty of other forms of media which are helpful for study, there are several youtubers you can find who discuss marxism, two I find particularly helpful and rarely discussed are Halim Alrah for raw theory breakdowns in regular words (please do check out his channel), and Kay and Skittles, for media breakdowns which apply marxist analysis to media to gain a better understanding of both.

I hope these are helpful! I've laid them out somewhat in order but the important part is to just pick one that sounds interesting and start. I find I often start several works of theory before finding one to finish - don't think of it as a bad thing if you do the same - reading one work of theory often gives you the knowledge you need to underestand another better, so even if you struggle to tackle something particular and move on elsewhere, you're still growing your knowledge base and that will make understanding it easier in the future when you do eventually try again.

Thank you for the ask <3

[phoenixwatchesmovies]

Dracula Season Watch Party: Nosferatu (1922)

Silent movies demand more attention, but it was worth it. This beats the shit out of the Bela Lugosi movie (no offense if you're a fan). It's the story of Dracula with the serial numbers filed off, to use that turn of phrase, and it cracks me up that the unauthorized adaptation that rips off Bram Stoker only survives today because of stolen prints. Piracy on top of piracy!

One thing that's always gotten me about silent films is the choppy way things move sometimes. It's uncanny as hell, and that works in this one's favor. Ymmv on how creepy it is, but it's certainly eerie. The print I watched had a good score on top of it, and that helps as well.

Actually, a good print makes all the difference, so here's the one I watched.

Before I get too much further, I do want to mention that this one does have some objectionable qualities. It leans heavily into vampire lore rooted in antisemitism, and Count Orlok himself appears to be a Jewish caricature. After doing some background research, it appears director F.W. Murnau was actually quite sympathetic to Jewish people and any harmful stereotypes weren't included maliciously, but I think that underlines the point I wanted to make. I'm not bringing this up to preach that no one should ever engage with problematic media, or that you can only do so to criticize it, but to stress how important it is to keep in mind that an artist's intentions don't always reflect in the art itself. Some of these stereotypes and ideas carry through to this day and cause harm to people, and while I don't think you have to be critical of all the media you consume all the time, it's worth checking in to make sure you're not incorporating harmful ideas into your worldview just by watching a movie. You are not immune to propaganda, etc. @re-dracula has a great episode on antisemitism and Gothic horror, for a more informed conversation.

Moving on, I've only ever seen Max Schreck as Orlok mentioned in talk about great performances in this, and yeah of course, a horror movie is only as effective as its villain/monster, but my personal fave was Greta Schröder as Ellen (this version's Mina). Her eyes are so expressive, and the dread on her face in certain shots gave me goosebumps. I mean, look at her!

The opening scenes between Ellen and Hutter, on the other hand, were sweet and adorable. Jonathan and Mina vibes all the way.

(Speaking of Hutter, if the total stranger who's putting me up while I sell him a house lunged at me to suck the blood from my cut thumb, I'd just climb right out the window and leave. RIP to Hutter but I'm different.)

I might do more reading on production, because I'm curious how movies are made in general, and back in the early days of film in particular. During the scene with Orlok driving Hutter to his castle, the film switches to negatives, and it's a really cool effect! I only wonder if it was intentional or if it was salvaged to restore the cut.

All in all, good movie! It's a staple of film and horror history, and I'm glad I finally watched it. :D

[dogsliampaynedoesntinstagram]

Did you watch that Niall reading fan fic video? Did you watch it to the very end? After he finished reading the fic, he laughed and said "that was some online Tumblr shit right there"...yeah that was dissapoiting to hear. I'm not a writer or have my own Tumblr blog but I took offense to this. To just laugh like that at your own fans, the ones who take the time to write the fics and those who take the time to read them. Not ok.

It is OK to laugh at people anon - it's a very common human reaction to the world. I'm sure you have laughed at a lot of people in your life. Fandom culture also involves a lot of laughing at people. You may not like that Niall laughed at tumblr - but that doesn't make it not OK.

I do think it's actually worth asking the question - what principle could possibly make Niall laughing at fans wrong in a moral sense? (As opposed to a reasonably normal thing to do that people can like and not like as they see fit). If people want to share their answers I'd be really interesting in hearing them. But I am going to take this question perhaps overly seriously (particularly when my basic response to the video is that it's pretty trivial), because I do think it's important to articulate and maintain the difference between 'I don't like this' and 'this is wrong'.

One of my basic beliefs is that saying something is wrong , as opposed to just something you don't like personally, is a pretty big deal. That a moral code is something pretty serious, it's necessary, obviously, but invoking morality just to express preferences has a quite significant history of doing incredible damage.

There are I think two basic strain of answers people might give to justify the idea that there's something wrong in a broad sense with what Niall did. The first is that it's wrong for Niall to laugh at fans, because they support his career in some way. That there is some sort of obligation or boundaries that a musician owes to fans that they don't owe to other people, beyond the contractual obligations of things they agree to do.

I actually think that's a deeply fucked up and controlling worldview that must be actively opposed. You can't buy control over another human being, no matter how much you stream. Most musicians have very complicated thoughts and feelings about fans, because fandom is a weird and complicated relationship. It's up to individual musicians to navigate that however works best for them, including laughing at people.

The other broad justification comes from some sort of analysis of society and one that argues that in some way Niall has power over fans and therefore it's wrong for him to laugh at them. My other anon phrased it as 'punching down'.

I think it' worth spelling out all the power Niall doesn't have over fans, he can't fire people, or evict them, or deprive them of ways of getting their needs met in any other way. He doesn't have any structural power to evaluate people - like teachers do. He can't grant or withhold necessary services from people. He can't deprive people of their liberty or cause people to be deprived of their liberty. He has no special access to violence. I think it's worth explicitly acknowledging the many ways people have real power over other people to put these discussions in context.

When fans suggest that other people have power over them and therefore it's wrong to mock them - they never mean any of these actual power structures that shape people's life. They usually mean something much more amorphous - it's a logic like 'fans are mostly women, therefore any mockery of fans is mockery of women, therefore its wrong'. (I think it's worth noting that a focus on fans as a category of people who should not be mocked, is very different from a formulation that suggested that particular forms of mockery were based in misogynist ideas and spelled out what they were. I would have a lot more time for something that framed this as making fun of women's sexual desire and expression. But I don't think that's how the discussion has been framed).

There is a real tendency within fandom to cast fans as a group of people who are inherently powerless and whom any form of criticism is wrong. This comes alongside a complete denial of the power in numbers and the ways that fans can and do exert power over people through their numbers. It is very tempting to position ourselves (both individually and collectively) as someone who can only ever be harmed, but can't do any harm to others. But it is a temptation that absolutely must be resisted - it is an anathema to solidarity and it is also an anathema to building strong relationships and treating other people as fully human.

One of the reasons I'm personally so resistant of the idea that fans are a group of people who must be protected and can easily be harmed - is because I see such a deep vein of denial within fandom about fans ability to harm. In fact if a family member, someone they're pretend to date, or someone who has interacted with 1D in any form in the world, says that they've been harmed by the number of people who have responded to them and the things that they've said, fandom's response is to treat this as an unreasonable attack of someone who has power over them - even if that's in no way true.

There may be something I'm missing - if anyone has an explanation for an underlying principle why they think it's not OK that Niall did a segment that contained an element of laughing at a culture that was built by fans I'd be interested to hear it.

But in the meantime I'm going to advocate for there being a difference between 'I don't like this' and 'this is not OK'. There are many reasons people might dislike that video of Niall - but that doesn't mean it's not OK.

[apocalypticavolition]

I think more buildings should be pink.

Oh you mean the post?

Well, I disdain it. I resent the implication that entertainment is not an acceptable end unto itself, just for starters. The Romans used it to distract the populace and that makes it evil? Well shit, guess it's time to embrace the gluten-free lifestyle because you will not believe what ELSE they used to distract the populace. Play is a wonderful and glorious thing and tools that exist solely for the purpose of play are as wonderful as the tools of industry or medicine.

I'm also not much interested in the idea that stories need to be about improving the world, for much the same reasons. You certainly shouldn't tell stories with the aim of making the world worse, but those are rather hard to produce and anyway if you tell a story that leaves the world pretty much as it is, why is that a problem exactly?

Passion is a reasonable ideal, though of course there are plenty of rather lovely short stories that were published in periodicals and thus written with no particular aim other than "I'd like to get paid this month". Further, the emphasis on every story needing to be important is rather silly. Not every story is important! Plenty are... just there. They'll only be experienced by a small subset of humanity, only loved by a fraction thereof, and even the lovers might never say, "This story saved my life" or equivalent.

Quality is never fully objective. We can certainly say that a story without spelling mistakes is superior to an otherwise identical story littered with them, and of course there are stories so exceptional we can place them firmly on one end of the scale or the other but... then there's everything in between. Further, an emphasis on clarity is silly. House of Leaves is a story loved by many and whatever it is that it's trying to say, it sure as fuck isn't doing so in a clear fashion. Moreso Finnegan's Wake. By OP's measure, neither of these stories are good and the world would be better off without them but I cannot agree with such claims even if I will never read Finnegan's Wake myself.

Theme is not always the most important thing either. Sometimes a story is really about its characters, or an examination of a particular real life event, or any number of things, and in such cases that central point is the thing that matters, not the theme.

As for DotA... the OP says, "What you've put out into the world is timeless." "What are people to make of it after you've gone?" and other such things that are exactly what Death of the Author is about and yet wants to deny it? They don't even understand it: it's not, "What the author meant is unknowable", it's, "All the stuff outside the story doesn't matter". If a poet writes something about a road he walked along one day with no intent but to catalogue his afternoon and everyone takes it as a resonant examination on the importance of choice due to the words in the poem, why should we ignore the fact that the work has transcended its creator? If someone writes an anti-television novel that is better as a condemnation of censorship, why be married to the worldview no one cares about when the alternative is so much stronger?

The last point is probably something I'm only chafing against because I've chafed against the rest though. I don't know that I'd phrase it quite the way they would, but that's just life.

Now never ask me to think during my work's hellish rebadging season again.

Some Things I Believe About Stories

Stories should not be PRIMARILY created to entertain. They should be created to teach, or encourage, or inspire, USING entertaining qualities. The Romans used entertainment to distract the populace from corruption. J. R. R. Tolkien, on the other hand, described "escapism" as "a prisoner of war escaping from enemy camp to go back home." You're not running from reality to fantasy when a story does it's job. You're running from the dark, twisted side of the world to something that reminds you of the good, the true, the beautiful, the correct. You've been imprisoned by bad ideas and confusion and dark perspectives, and the story shows you how to escape and get back to true and beautiful reality. It's got a point, it's not just for diversion.

Stories should be made to serve others and leave the world better than they found it. Storytellers should not only tell a story to exorcize their personal demons or point to how clever and artistic they are. That can be a nice bonus. But the point should be to serve the audience. Think about it. When it's made, it's timeless; it will be read or watched or listened to by the next generation, or the next. What are the storytellers letting fall into the hands of the people who come after they're not around to explain or gain a profit?

The storyteller should be passionate about the story while they make it. This could look like a sense of duty, or fun, or just excitement. But those outward emotions usually signal an inward understanding of how important the story is, and therefore, a level of compassion and care for the eventual audience.

You can like a story or dislike a story. You can interpret a story or misinterpret a story. Those things are subjective. But whether or not a story is good is objective: it can be measured. Does the story say what it is trying to say in the clearest, most compelling way possible? If yes, it's a good story. If no, it might be great entertainment. It might be funny. It might be cool. It might be quotable or franchise-able or profitable or even memorable. But it's not a good story if it does not say something in the clearest, most compelling way possible.

A story's main point, or theme, is the most important thing about it. The characters, the set design, the pacing, the soundtrack, the language, the use of color or lighting or blocking etc.; all of those pieces work best when they are unified in the goal of communicating that main point or theme.

Death of the author = death of the story. It's point is to say something. If you claim the speaker's intent is meaningless, so are the words spoken. If you claim it can mean anything, your words are meaningless too. We all might as well tell no stories and blabber gibberish instead. It’s one thing to say you understand what the author intended, and you like to think of it in/wish it were another way. But it’s quite another to say that what the author intended is unknowable or doesn’t matter. You’re either calling the author a bad storyteller or, again, recommending we all speak gibberish.

Both form (the quality of the story and it's elements) and content (the main point or lessons) matter. Without one you have a lecture, not a story. Without the other you have entertainment, but no valuable, timeless, beautiful truth to make it a “story.”

[lunapwrites]

Repaying the favor of unusual characters:

Petunia Dursley

Percy Weasley

Regulus Black

You can skip any if you’d like no worries <3

Ohooo, fairly strong feelings on the lot!

Favorite thing about them

Petunia knew what she wanted and fucking went for it. I have to respect that if nothing else -- she shared that with her sister. Also, don't let anyone ever tell you that Vernon is the head of that family. He is not.

Percy is honestly so insufferable but radiates such intense youngest-oldest-middle-child energy that I cannot help but relate to him on an instinctual level.

Regulus has the top redemption arc of the story, regardless of how little it was explored in canon.

Least favorite thing about them

Petunia is literally top tier awful mom. Not sure if she beats out Walburga but it's like. Close.

Percy see above about COMPLETELY INSUFFERABLE. The man simps for authority and I'm NOT ABOUT IT.

Regulus has no information about him aside from what we're hearing second-hand and so none of it is reliable. WHO ARE YOU, WATER BOY???

Favorite line

Petunia not a line so much as a moment: the farewell scene with Harry when she was leaving and stopped to say something to him and then didn't. There is so much character packed into that non-line.

Percy "I quit" mid-duel was such a big dick energy move and I'm so glad that Fred got to be present for that. (I am still pretending it wasn't the last thing he ever heard.)

Regulus the only "line" he got was the letter, but boy does it tell you a lot about what Regulus was like as a person. Which is to say, very much like his brother, whether he wanted to admit that or not lol.

brOTP

I'm just going to blanket-statement here: their actual siblings. I will not be taking criticism on that.

OTP

Petunia living her best single life and maybe unfucking her worldview.

Percy and Oliver Wood OR Pansy Parkinson. I got sold on the latter in very specific circumstances.

Regulus okay so this is out of left field a bit but while Jegulus is a vibe and I dig it, can we talk about the sheer drama potential of Remus just having the hots for both of the Black Brothers? Especially in the middle of the war? THINK ABOUT IT.

nOTP

Petunia and Vernon tbh. They just aren't good for each other. Toxic and stagnant in all the worst ways.

Percy and Hermione. Just seems uninspired, and I feel like they'd bring out the worst in each other.

Regulus and anyone with the same last name as him, I know it's A Thing with their family but please Do Not.

Random headcanon

Petunia is the one that Harry got all that sass from; he talks and writes like his mom, and that's all learned from Petunia, who is more like her sister than she ever wanted to admit.

Percy did not flip out only over the fact that his dad was claiming he only got his job because the Minister was trying to use him. It's because his parents were trying to explain to all the kids what happened to his old pet rat, and it made him feel like he was being tied to a bunch of murders, right on the tail of all the shit that went down with Crouch. His thinking there was that if Dumbledore went to the Ministry with that, he could completely destroy the entire family. But his phrasing made it sound like he was only worried about his new job with the Minister, which is when Arthur slapped him down and the argument broke out in earnest. (I have more about his war efforts but I'm low on time.)

Regulus was exactly like Sirius, only better at listening quietly and acting out his impulses more subtly. Sirius took the blame for many things that Regulus did as a child. They still would have died for each other, even at the end.

Unpopular opinion

Petunia probably looked quite a bit more like her sister than canon details; it was most likely just unflattering haircuts/clothes/personality lol.

Percy I like him better than Bill or Charlie, and I find him more narratively interesting than the Twins.

Regulus probably didn't betray V and the Death Eaters for ideological reasons, but more than likely it was a political one. I am distinguishing these because I don't think he changed his tune on Muggleborns and most likely still considered his family wizarding royalty. I think he just didn't want to bow to anyone, and resorted to treason in the shadows rather than outright defiance like his brother in order to achieve that end.

Song I associate with them

OK so sad times here, but I don't... actually have one? Mostly because most everything I listen to becomes Remus or Sirius lmao. Sorry. XD

Favorite picture of them

Petunia: Tough, but I really like this one from the HP Lexicon https://www.hp-lexicon.org/character/dursley-family/petunia-dursley/

Like, what a mood that is.

Percy https://oliverandpercy.tumblr.com/post/175309545590/your-rat-is-a-freaky-little-man-yeah-this-is

EXCUSE ME.

Regulus https://artbyflor.tumblr.com/post/619147373646577664/regulus-arcturus-black-lighting-study-character

(I love Flor's art so very much <3 ) But I especially love how this one illustrates just how very like his brother he actually is without actually showing much at all.

Thanks for the ask!! <3

[fireemblems24]

Hey! It's the anon who sent the ask about the imperialism thing.

I guess it's kinda ironic because uh, the country that did the whole imperialism shtick to my country is the US. The saddest part is that it's barely acknowledged and I'm pretty sure it's not even studied in your history either. If you're curious, look up Benevolent Assimilation. Yup. That's what they called it.

Anyway I had a realization when you mentioend about why not Edelgard try to enact the changes on her Empire first? And I realised... Yeah, why not???

A possible thing she could've done that's less bloody than a war is to change her Empire first. And then befriend the future leaders of the Kingdom and Alliance while they were in school. That would've made things fairly peaceful between them and also if the changes in the Empire are working out well, she could've promoted the same methods to Dimitri and Claude for them to establish in their own countries. She doesn't need to conquer them. I mean, yeah this is a very easier said than done situation (especially since there's still TWSITD) but again, less bloody alternatives.

To be fair, Edelgard handling this entire affair in a flawed manner such as a war is also fine by me. Seeing imperialism in media is fine especially if it highlights the flaws of it because yes, it and its long term effects need to be acknowledged. But the game just feels like it's condoning her... And there's also the ton of people who agree with her who just make me uncomfortable really because it feels so close to real life. Not only that seeing as this is a Japanese game and the Japanese have a... history with imperialism (in which they also occupied my country... we don't really get a break) it's just uncomfortable.

Again, I like Edelgard and the morally grey potential of her decisions. My problem really is in the execution. I would definitely tolerate CF much more if the BE had more prominent roles as critics? I think that's the only way they'd really fit in CF tbh. Criticise Edelgard, question her actions, make her question her own actions, make her realise the damage she caused. Stuff like that would've made CF into such a good route. Like, if AM is Dimitri's character study, why couldn't we have had Edelgard's character study in CF?

I guess in the end, the main reason why I'm really talkative about the whole Edelgard issue is because I really want to love her? I see the potential in her character — I love her design, her general personality, her voice actress, the fact that she's actually different from the usual female character in these games. But I just end up liking her and not really loving her because sometimes the games feels like it's forcing me to love her so much that I just eh. I still don't like her Byleth attachment.

But yeah I think I'm going to stop bothering you all about this since I think I'm just repeating restated points again.

I briefly looked up “Benevolent Imperialism.” Sounds exactly like the kind of phrase an Imperialist would label their conquest as. I’ll have to learn more about it because surprise, surprise, our history lessons do leave that out. 

As for your comments on Edelgard, I agree with everything you said. I cannot believe her actions are wholly benevolent and in the name of bettering society only because she never once attempts to work with other leaders. She’s either so far up her own ass she legitimately thinks killing every other major power in Fodlan except herself is really the best option for everyone or there’s more to her actions than her ideals - like killing all the dragons/forcing them into hiding forever or getting back what she thinks is rightly hers because the Empire ruled those territories hundreds of years ago. 

My issue, like yours, is that this game acts like she’s some kind of saint. She’s sacrificing her own soul by bloodying her own hands for the benefit of all. Whenever she talks about all the damage the war causes, it’s not about the victims, it’s about how sorry we should feel for her because she’s dirtying herself so everyone can live in her future utopia. 

It takes a grey, interesting perspective and makes it not only very uninteresting (and at times irritating as a player who doesn’t agree with her but it forced to act like she’s the biggest victim in all this), but problematic. To say nothing of how this glorifies war and skips over any and all negative side effects, it’s far more concerning in it’s presentation of Imperialism as a good thing, as a “liberation” of the countries who are getting violently taken over against their will. 

Like you, I don’t mind Imperialism in fiction. I don’t even mind seriously entertaining the question - but what if the conqueror really does improve things? What I do mind is this really black/white presentation where Imperialism is framed as liberation, like the Imperialist actually knows better than the countries she’s taking over. What’s super uncomfortable when analyzing things deeper is how unapologetic CF is at spinning the same propaganda used to devastate other countries, many still reeling from the effects. 

You could just write it off as fiction. It’s just a Fire Emblem video game no one should take too seriously. And I’m always torn about this argument because I don’t want to police fiction - at all - but I’m also aware of how fiction can change your worldview. You’d think people would be smart enough to separate fiction and reality but they often either don’t or use fiction to reinforce their own world views. 

I’m not surprised at all people agree with Edelgard. She’s presented as a liberator, her route presents war like its only victim is the perpetrator because she’s just oh so sad everyone else is forcing her to kill them. But I’m very alarmed if anyone wholly agrees with her and thinks she’s right to invade the Kingdom and the Alliance. You can love a character and not agree with their actions. I love a character who’s quite similar to Edelgard on the surface, Reinhard von Lohengramm, but I do not agree with his actions at all, even if I root for his victory at every turn in his own story anyways, because sometimes it’s fun to watch a magnificent bastard crush everyone under their heels. 

And yeah my main frustration with her is that I really want to like her. But her presentation is so bad that I’m struggling to enjoy her in her own route. 

[orange-peel-candy]

This is highly speculative, and is more like puzzle-solving than making inferences based on evidence that is actually there, but. Reading your analysis really got me thinking...

In one of your screencaps, Tokinaga says that what he hates most about Allula (AKA what he's attracted to) is she hates him. That is actually a fascinating departure from what—based on everything we know about him so far—one would think he would hate the most. It's not "a person who lacks morals," but "a person that hates me." I'm sure there's a large overlap between "people who hate Tokinaga" and "people who lack morals," but... the phrasing is very telling.

This distinction is probably why Orokappi isn't a potential suitor for the role of Tokinaga's murderer. Although Orokappi lacks (or rather, lacked) morals, he has always been fond of Tokinaga. Tokinaga finds that preferable... maybe even preferable to a good person who hates him.

A lot of the chapter title pages depict Tokinaga at around middle school age, instead of as an adult. He seems morose (nothing new there) and a little lost. Allula, during one of their private conversations, also accuses him of being a toy, who only does what "mommy" and "daddy" want him to do. To me, what this implies is that Tokinaga is actually quite childish—or, to be more specific: insecure—in spite of his usually confident attitude. I don't know how much of Allula's guess is right, seeing as she didn't know some crucial facts about Tokinaga at the time and she was just trying to hit him where it hurt, but... Tokinaga's internal image of himself is likely someone who is desperate of the approval of others.

As you pointed out with the black-and-white morality Tokinaga imposes on himself versus the gray morality he applies to everyone else, he's his own harshest critic. "Hates me and insults me with every fiber of their being" is something he does to himself already. I would say... it's a defensive strategy. He's hard on himself, so that there's less things "wrong" with him for other people to notice and/or so that other people's criticisms will feel softer in comparison.

It kinda... explains a lot. If Tokinaga is so adverse to being hated, then he sculpts his personality around what other people will like. First, his family. Then, the rest of the world. We're introduced to him from Waka's perspective, where he enters her life as the reliable adult figure she never had—and she gets attached to him almost immediately. Allula portrays all of this as a clever manipulation tactic. Tokinaga has identified what Waka needs, and uses it to control her. Tokinaga maintains that his presence as an adult is beneficial to Waka, but it's also clear that he feels a ton of guilt over deceiving her.

Ethics are defined by what the majority of the population believes is "right," yes? By striving to respond "correctly" to every situation, Tokinaga is avoiding the hatred or judgement of others. In this way, he's probably deluded himself into thinking that his outward kindness is just a show he puts on to protect himself, and that he's not a good person at all.

You noted in your previous analysis, the two characters who see Tokinaga the most objectively are Allula and Orokappi. Allula is everything Tokinaga hates/wants because her reaction to his "true self" is what he believes he deserves. Orokappi, on the other hand... doesn't fall into any of the categories Tokinaga separates the world into. He sees Tokinaga for who he really is, but he doesn't reject him—instead, he continues to treat him like normal. If it's like I think and Tokinaga's fixation on morality is born of a fear of being hated, then Orokappi is out here casually blowing a hole in his entire worldview. If, deep down, he's really such a revolting person, then why would Orokappi want to be friends with someone like that?

时鞭自我弊不轻，永宽他人宜为重

//The Intrigue Of Tokinaga Sachiyuki

In the first essay, I speculated about Ahu’az, Furuya Rin (a.k.a. Yako), and Chapter 58.

This one, meanwhile, is a character analysis of Tokinaga. It is the second of my After God essay series. Beware; it's a long read.

You don’t always get one of your favorite characters gone through my Lyndisian treatment, @orange-peel-candy, so I hope this has been a good way for you to pass the time.

Oh, you’re curious about what the Chinese title says?

“Always punishing himself for his profound sins; always forgiving others and prioritizing their virtues.”

It’s my crappy attempt at making a 对联, “duilian poetry.”

There are rules in making one. The same number of characters are used in both lines to form a couplet. There have to be counterpoints in tonal pattern between two lines, such that if they “counter” each other. Words from both lines have to be within the same category, and the meaning of the first line must correspond to the second line's meaning.

I did break one rule though: the first line’s last character has to be of an “oblique” tone while the second line’s last character has to be of a “leveled” tone. In my duilian title, the opposite is true.

There’s also just how lacking in beauty my poetry is. Not much can be done about my genuine absence of literary competency, I’m afraid!

Yes. You might also have noticed it. The first character of both lines makes up the word “时永/ 時永,” which is... “Tokinaga.”

---------------------------------------

Super Good Guy; Very Moral

The first time I read this manga, the one thing that stood out a lot to me, especially against the backdrop of After God’s society and every other character in this series—is how unambiguously moral Tokinaga is.

This is how Nayuu described the Bio-Tech department:

Chapter 4

Not even a minute passed and we got this scene:

Chapter 4

Tokinaga stood out a lot because he was the only one who opposed the unethical treatment of  “a child,” even though such a thing was standard of his colleagues. These people were known for being unscrupulous, yet Tokinaga was calling people out like he was a YouTuber dropping some bombs about his fellow creators.

There are many, many moments like these. In a world full of characters with grey morality, he stood out like a sore thumb just on the virtue of his unyielding, monkish self-discipline.

Chapter 4. Dude was seriously against this when no one else commented on it.

Chapter 9

One might, because of this, pass him over as uninteresting (at least, before the reveal of who he is). He’s straight-laced! He’s nice! He’s the good guy. He will do what’s ethically right; there’s no ambivalence. And yet, I’ve always found his strange fixation with ethics fascinating.

Yes, there’s a personal angle to this—a very close acquaintance (to my chagrin) is incredibly interested in ethics and often ponders about them, even if that situation or thought experiment is pragmatically insignificant. Another dear friend of mine also adheres to ethical principles with the same level of monkish discipline. In both cases, there are deeper reasons for their fixations.

Even before the reveal of Tokinaga’s other identity, this quality of him was already grounds for curiosity. With the benefit of hindsight, I’ll even argue that the mangaka has been teasing us about the full scope of his character with little psychological breadcrumbs.

There is a startling lack of flexibility in Tokinaga’s frame of ethics.

Tokinaga seemed dangerously close to holding a black-and-white morality. But there’s more to it.  

He’s perfectly capable of allocating leeway to most people whose ethics and morals are less than exemplary. After all, the department he cooperates with—due to Waka—is deadass staffed with moral-is-optional weirdos. Their amorality doesn’t make him see them as less, though. He values every single one of them—their safety sent him into a self-sacrificial panic, while their lost lives crushed him straight into depression.

It seems to me that, in Tokinaga’s mind, the only person who should adhere to this black-and-white morality is himself. He needs to be. He has to be.

-----

“Apologize! Apologize! Apologize!”

Chapter 33 is one of my favorite chapters in the manga so far. It’s raw as fuck and a great character study—and it features a very intriguing facet of Tokinaga’s psychology.

Now, dude had just experienced a heart-wrenching betrayal from a dear friend. Losing control of his emotions was only expected of anyone. But he had a very peculiar fixation. Despite the weight of Orokapi’s crimes (including the many people he had murdered as the Snake God), Tokinaga was hyper-focus on only two things: the injustice Orokapi had done to him—and the act of apology.

Previously, he spelled out why he didn’t believe Orokapi could apologize: “You can’t apologize, feel remorse, have a change of heart, or comprehend sadness.” And yet, subsequently, “apologize to me” was what he fixated on. He discarded the commands from his superior and colleague and went berserk in his personal demand for that apology:

Why is an apology somehow enough to forgive the things Orokapi has done? Lives were lost. Damages were done. Orokapi, as Tokinaga’s mentor had said, doesn’t live by human ethics and acts like an animal. And even Tokinaga himself had called Orokapi’s capacity for remorse into question.

So why the fixation with apology? Because, I’d argue, to Tokinaga, it’s the “right” ritual to do. Tokinaga’s stringent, black-and-white ethics demand a ritual.

It demands something that needs to be performed after crossing ethical wrongs, even if it no longer makes sense. Here, an apology is a ritual of absolution, even if it’s technically useless after all that had happened.

Tokinaga clings to it. Why?

Could it be because it’s a ritual Tokinaga himself undertakes?

As you continue the chapter, you might notice—with the benefit of hindsight—that the things Tokinaga was screaming almost sounded like things he would say to himself.

At some point, it could seem like he was projecting himself onto Orokapi—who, by being such a dear friend to him, who learned to be an ethical human from him—was like an extension of himself.

“Don’t run away, dumbass.” “Doesn’t it suck being scolded right now?” “Who would want to be friends with someone like that?”

—all of these could apply to Orokapi, but they can also be applied to Tokinaga himself. For example, Allula called him out on one specific accusation Tokinaga leveled at Orokapi: running away.

Chapter 55

-------

Quite the Literal Hate Boner

We later know one(there are plenty) of the biggest reasons Tokinaga hates himself: he gets aroused and hard from nothing but violence and hate. The more vile and violent, the harder his hormones run. And all this happens contrary to what his higher-ordered thinking believes and thinks.

Chapter 54

Side note: remember how Tokinaga shouted at Orokapi with “Doesn’t it suck being scolded right now?”  Yet, here, he was admitting to his body getting hard from being insulted. The one that felt pained when being scolded was his mind. The part of Tokinaga he believes is him, “the ethical, pure one.” The one he’s constantly reinforcing and tormenting, over and over, as his fitful penance.

Now, contrary to what Tokinaga believed, this isn’t as black-and-white as his thought process made it out to be. You can also just accept that this is who you are, and mitigate what you don’t like reasonably. You’re living in a crappy nigh-post-apocalyptic society with a bunch of amoral people who regularly skirt the edge of ethics, goddamn it. You’re hardly the only one with questionable morality.

In fact, it’s fine. You never act out on these desires. You don’t harbor the thought of wanting to kickstart a violent rampage to pleasure yourself. Tokinaga’s (literal) hate boner can even be safely relegated to the realm of kinks. There are plenty of doms who will happily take him as their cute puppy-dog sub.

But Tokinaga cannot accept it. He is determined to maintain his sense of purity. Even in the face of his sexual desire. Or the decisions he had made using his time-loop powers to ensure his “perfect death.”

He wants to believe he is “clean.” And that he can keep himself that way.

If you were a certain kind of person with a similar thought process as Tokinaga, you might go to punishing lengths to hold onto this quixotic sense of purity, while simultaneously tormented by the anxiety of it slipping away from you.

You might, perhaps, cling to every ritual of purification you can to scrub yourself clean of this constant onslaught of contamination. Apology is one of them. Eviscerating yourself and other forms of mental flagellation is another.

He even mentioned the latter. He described how much his heart ached and trembled at the sight of brutality while his body went ahead and got excited. And then, hinting at punishment, he admitted to torturing his mind with intense mental castigation every night.

Chapter 54

This matches the experience of my aforementioned friend and acquaintance—who, last I checked, are not godkillers who can turn back time (aww man).

Nonetheless, they suffer from a specific mental disorder that I find to be an interesting comparison to Tokinaga’s psychology.

---

Tokinaga Sachiyuki:  An Allegory of Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder

Chapter 50

Hey! If you’re like my acquaintance, who freezes up at OCD mentions sometimes, take care when reading this part!

Now, I’m not too terribly interested in headcanons. The mangaka has made no such proclamation, either, and so my personal principles come into play. I won’t claim he definitely has OCD.

What I would like to put forward, though, is that Tokinaga’s psychology mirrors much of a person suffering from obsessive-compulsive disorder. What he has isn’t an exact match to the real-world experience because, again, he’s a fictional character who can loop time and might be a dragon (oops, did I just drop a teaser for my next essay? Hmmmmmm).

---

“This isn’t what I want! This isn’t who I am!”

What separates OCD and Obsessive-Compulsive Personality Disorder is that thoughts and compulsions in the former are egodystonic, while the latter is egosyntonic [1][2].

Egosyntonic: thoughts, behaviors, and feelings that are perceived by the self to be in harmony with their self-image, as well as their goals and needs. “There is nothing maladjusted with my behavior; this is  who I ‘really’ am.”

Egodystonic: thoughts, behaviors, desires, compulsions etc. that go against one’s perception of their self-image, “who they are,” and are dissonant to the needs and the goals of the ego. “There is something seriously fucked-up with my thoughts/behaviors.”

Chapter 55

Tokinaga exhibits egodystonic agony in droves. His sexual desire insults the self-image he holds about himself—the “Tokinaga” who’s disgusted by carnage, unforgivingly repulsed by brutality, as well as terrified of the frequency of such violence occurring in life. He hated all of it with his soul, and yet his penis is getting so fucking hard by seeing it.

---

Intrusive Thoughts and The Behaviors/Rituals To Fight Them

His sexual desire, as well as any thoughts of him being possibly unethical or immoral, are his version of intrusive thoughts. They aren’t just “negative thoughts” he can swat away without them corroding his sense of self. They are his obsessions[3][4]. He had managed to keep them at bay for the first bulk of the story—unless, of course, you notice his compulsive adherence to ethics and his overall behavior from Chapter 30 onward. The façade cracked as the story progressed to Orokapi’s betrayal; it dealt a blow to his mental stability. In Chapter 55, Allula even wonders if Tokinaga is suffering from a mental decline.

All of these distressing obsessions compelled Tokinaga to follow a very stringent set of ethics—which he mostly applies only to himself. To me, his rigid ritual of an apology is as good an allegorical insight as any. His nightly mental castigation, where he fervently visualizes himself dying with all the sins of the world on his shoulder, is an even wider window to such a psyche.

What sets him as a great allegory of OCD while distinguishing himself from OCPD is that he’s not doing this because he believes he’s a good, sinless person.

He’s doing it because he believes he’s the worst.

So shitty, in fact, that he thinks being killed by Allula—whose abuses would put him through the most excruciating, pleasureless pain while his body experiences blissful, painless pleasure—is the only fitting end he deserves and therefore works toward that goal. Before he gets there, though, he’d have to endure his many intrusive obsessions... and hopefully, along the way, eradicate the embodiments of violence the masses had called “gods.”

-----

Conclusion

Chapter 20. This expression tells you a lot about what Orokapi genuinely sees in his friend. One of my favorite faces yet.

Again, lemme reiterate: there is no canonical word on Tokinaga being a sufferer of OCD. I mean, if he were to perform compulsive behaviors, such as skin-peeling or hair-pulling, it might become more canonically implicative.

What I’m going off from here is his actions and psyche so far, as well as the empirical recognition—by my friend and acquaintance—of his experience. To me, OCD has become a fascinating and fitting framework for understanding some of the complexities of this character.

It speaks to the strength of After God’s character writing when Tokinaga turns out to be a great allegorical presentation for OCD in media.

Side note: I’m personally a big fan of writing about atypical experiences in an organic, humanizing way however possible, because it helps readers understand the experience without too much focus on “therapy speaks” and the rules in the DSM-V. Yes, I say this as someone who studies cognitive science, is familiar with that manual, and advocates more rigor and replicability in the fields of psychology.

In case the length of this essay did not show it clearly enough: I adore Tokinaga. As of now, I sincerely believe him when he says he’s genuinely a good person... because, as I witnessed from my friend, it takes a certain kind of good person to be able to get this tormented in the first place. More importantly, Tokinaga may have clung to a stringent sense of morality out of compulsion, but it still makes him a good person in action.

If you feel similarly to him—OCD or not—remember that one’s mind could often distort one’s vice into virtue, and virtue into vice.

Maybe you’re moral because you’re compelled to do so to battle your intrusive thoughts, and so it feels less “authentic" than being "genuinely moral."

But I disagree. As is the spirit of Buddhist Philosophy (which I personally adhere to; also lowkey study), I think you’re already pragmatically good, and through those actions, you already position yourself in an advantageous spot for moral progress. And that will always be a cause for optimism.

Thank you for reading my ramble—despite the length! I hope you've enjoyed it.

----

Citations:

“Egosyntonic and egodystonic” In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egosyntonic_and_egodystonic

“Obsessive–compulsive personality disorder. In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obsessive%E2%80%93compulsive_personality_disorder

“Obsessive-compulsive disorder” In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obsessive%E2%80%93compulsive_disorder

“Intrusive thought.” In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intrusive_thought

[neil-neil-orange-peel]

I've already entered in two but since you're doing it again and if you don't mind, how about Colin?

Ah, my favourite diva! ✨

Colin Grigson

Sexuality headcanon ~ Look, I can't explain it exactly but Colin screams bisexuality to me. I think it's the clothes and makeup he wears in More Bad News.

OTP ~ I'm gonna shock everyone now and say... Spider. I know there isn't really a lot to go off (athough, to be fair, you could say that for shipping any of them) but I noticed that, when Colin is being a wimp and crying after arguing with Vim on The Tube, Spider seems to try to comfort him. I think a similar thing happens on their album after Den beats Colin up. Now, Colin doesn't really appreciate this because, well, he is a melodramatic tosser, but it seems to be a thing that Spider does anyway. Plus, I'm about 95% sure that in More Bad News, when they're being carted off by the police and Colin and Vim are in a right state, Spider tells Colin something along the lines of "we really have to stop meeting like this" when Colin gets into the van and it feels to me just a teeny tiny bit flirty. Definitely the wrong time for it 😂 and in fairness he could have been saying it to both Colin and Vim... But let me have the small stuff, okay. 😂

That said, I will happily read VimXColin. I totally get why that is shipped - just look at those opposing energies! And, as I've said before about other duos, they're Rik and Ade's characters so they obviously have chemistry.

BrOTP ~ Heh. Does Colin Grigson have friends? A good question. With the other three band members I could easily put them together as BrOTPs but Colin is kinda the odd one out. I mean, he's from a whole different social class and has a different worldview but - unlike Rick of TYO for example - he doesn't really try to hide it? As much? Or as well as Rick? And that's saying something because Rick doesn't hide it well.

He does try to conceal the truth a bit in both Bad News Tour and More Bad News (the Trevor fiasco being a good example of this 😂). However, there's a track on their album where he and Vim get into a nasty spat about education and Colin lauds his higher education - courtesy of his social class and what he sees as his inherently higher intellect - over Vim. And then there are interviews where Colin talks about being a chairman of the Young Conservatives Association and wanting a nice steady job and big house somewhere in Middle England... So I guess as his character developed and changed they decided to have him stop trying to hide his background and embrace it in a tremendously snobby way. 😂 Probably so he could juxtapose Vim even more, as Vim is an inverted snob.

But anyway, THE POINT OF THIS: Colin doesn't fit with the rest of the band so if he has any friends then they probably work in a bank.

NOTP ~ Den, most probably. I think they're the most unlikely pairing out of the band anyway. Den is too blunt for Colin and Colin is too prissy for Den. I can imagine they'd both be horrified at the prospect and Den might beat Colin up if he ever thought he was coming on to him. But if anybody out there ships them then please continue to do so!

First headcanon that pops into my head ~ He and Ali Kitson (from TCSP Private Enterprise) met in a pub once and had a bitching session about their bandmates, so now this is a regular thing. They probably shouldn't actually get along but just trust me on this one.

Favourite line from this character ~ I have Colin to thank for adding "frightfully groovy" to my lexicon of phrases. As for a full quote, maybe this one: "Another heavy metal day. No sleep 'til Castle Donington, better have some vibes!" That said, I can think of at least three others that I find equally funny. 😂

One way in which I relate to this character ~ Hmm. This is very tenuous because our situations and social class aren't the same but... Vim often teases Colin about going to college. I went to uni while a friend did not and they've always seen it as a point of pride.

Thing that gives me second hand embarrassment about this character ~ He is so obviously trying and failing to be cool so much of the time and it gives me such second hand embarrassment. 😂 His very voice is put on to sound cool. He really wants the best of both worlds, I guess. In More Bad News, when he's waggling his tongue at the camera and then everyone turns to him to ask how many copies they need to buy and he's mid waggle, oh wow. 😂 I feel it. The embarrassment that is, not his tongue. I'd tell you all if I'd ever felt Colin Grigson's tongue. Promise...

Cinnamon roll or problematic fave? ~ Despite my subjective reasoning that he is the second nicest (whatever that means) member of Bad News... He's too much of a Tory to be a cinnamon roll. Problematic fave it is! 😂 I do love this dramatic idiot though.

Thanks for the ask!

[abusedsapphics-archive]

hi! i hope it's okay to ask two questions in one. my first one is because of what i've been through, i find it hard to do what i want that makes me happy like i'm afraid that they'll see me and stop me. what should i do? my second one is how do i get myself to believe that i shouldn't really listen to a certain person since they're toxic? i hope those aren't too difficult.

it’s okay to ask two questions, yes :)

i assume, from the way you phrased it, that these people don’t have power to inflict consequences on you. if that’s the case, start slow and small, let yourself get used to the fear. maybe ask a friend, or someone who helps you feel safe, to be with you for the first few times. pick a short sentence, a reminder that you’re beyond the reach of whoever might hurt you - my go to is “they don’t know i’m here” and, when the fear hits you, repeat it in your mind, slowly, making sure to keep breathing, until it sinks. every time you go out and do the things that you were forbidden to do, it’ll be a little easier.

as for how to stop listening to toxic people… remind yourself that whatever they’re saying comes from their worldview, their beliefs. try to understand, if you can, exactly what they’re defending themselves against - there’s always something. you know how men on dating apps insult women who don’t reply to them fast enough? they’re defending themselves from rejection (”she doesn’t want to talk to me because she’s a (whatever), not because i’m not interesting”). once you find why they need to believe that something is true, it’ll be easier for you to realize that it isn’t.

[herawell]

#someday i'll finish my essay about the big picture as an antagonistic force. it's only been on my list of things to do for uh. ever#eiffel really cannot be convinced by Big Picture ideology in any form because he's so. unambitious and inwardly focused#he's not self-reflective at ALL but he is self-centered#and in some ways that's genuinely a good thing#but it's interesting. that he vilifies himself and tries so hard to. externalize his redemption and see some humanity in others#as proof he might be able to be better. when if those people consider themselves villains at all then they consider it necessary#i'm not sure if i'm phrasing this the way i want to but his worldview is just. fundamentally incompatible.#when i think about eiffel i think a lot about. how self-loathing is also a kind of exceptionalism. considering yourself uniquely bad#is its own way of avoiding accountability.#idk. it's complicated. it's a lot. it's interesting that lovelace talks about the 'big picture' when she's briefly a sort-of antagonist#but her 'big picture' is personal and emotionally driven in a way no other use of the phrase is#and then of course you have hera in am i alone now. such a big big universe etc.#when she betrays that perspective immediately and directly by talking about it through such a narrow personal framework#one of the most direct examples of 'big picture' thinking vs. personal connection in that contradiction. but that's another post maybe.

the "big picture" - whether that refers to some detached, calculated greater good; ruthless ambition and progress for the sake of progress; or even the dear listeners' cosmic indifference - as an antagonistic force in wolf 359 is so fascinating to me because of the way eiffel as a protagonist is set up to oppose it, just by nature of who he is. eiffel retains his humanity even under the most inhumane circumstances. his strength is in connection, and with that he's able to reach others who share his core values, but he's operating under a fundamentally different framework from the show's antagonists. he can never understand where they're coming from or be swayed by their points of view because, for better or worse, he can only see the world through a close personal lens.

it's an ideological conflict he has with all of them, but notably with hilbert: "you talk about helping people, but what about the real, live people around you? [...] that's your problem. you're so zoomed out." eiffel will never, ever see that "big picture" because he is so zoomed in. at his best, he puts things into perspective and grounds the people around him. at his worst, his perspective narrows so drastically inwards that he becomes blind to everyone and everything else. his failings are deeply, tragically human - they're personal, they're impulsive, they're self-destructive. they're selfish. no matter how much he might try to narrativize or escape from himself, he's still left with doug eiffel: "it's taken me this long to realize that running from everyone else means that you're alone with yourself." eiffel could never be convinced to harm others on purpose, but he has hurt people, and it's never been because he didn't care. the very fact that he cares so much, that he's incapable of reconciling the hurt he's caused with the things he values, is what keeps him from real growth for so long. where many of the other characters in wolf 359 will justify their cruelty in service of something they consider more important, eiffel is so caught up in vilifying himself and the fear that he's always going to harm the people he cares for without meaning to that he shuts himself off from the people who care about him and perpetuates his own self-fulfilling prophecy.