#it feels less like actual criticism and at this point just feels like elaborate justification for cringe culture which I hate

[reel-fear]

Honestly, every single time the whole 'poppy playtime is a bendy rip-off' stuff ever shows up I find it all extremely unconvincing and silly.

For one thing, rip-off usually is meant to imply that it's a cheap lazy copy of a better more polished thing, and uh. Sorry but even from chapter 1? Poppy Playtime is a better game than Bendy, it has a simple but understandable story, the game manages to be thrilling, creepy, and very intense at times... I mean that Huggy chase in the vents ALONE puts it way above Batim for me.

I mean BATDR had the most slow stupid chase I've ever seen [and every other encounter with the ink demon is text telling u he's there and then a timer goes down and u get jumpscared] and batim's chases were either silly or just not nearly as theatric or terrifying as that.

When making the vent sequence I mean not only is it absolutely horrifying to realize how fast Huggy is in there but also it's so theatric and cool? The fact that you round a corner after thinking you escaped only to see a terrifying animation of that thing crawling toward you is awesome! I wish Bendy had stuff like that!

And all the stuff it shares with Bendy are generic things Bendy ripped from other horror games/media anyways. I'm not saying Poppy Playtime isn't inspired by Bendy I for sure think it is but Bendy is such a generic story that somehow fails to do tropes 100 other horror games have done any comparison only makes Poppy Playtime look better.

"It has employees being sacrificed for their company" That is not a concept Bendy invented, literally look at any of the sci-fi horror series Bendy is very inspired by. This is literally a twist in the original Alien.

"It has a scary woman forcing you to do tasks for her" Once again, not a concept Bendy invented, a scary mysterious person forcing you to do fetch-quests is a concept found in tons of horror media. And at least Poppy Playtime gave you a chase with her and let you defeat her, look at poor malice. She's barely on screen for more than 10 minutes before she gets stabbed.

"It has a cult worshipping the monster" This is something tons of horror games and media have done too. I mean In The Tall Grass has a guy who worships a giant magical rock in the middle of a grass maze, Bioshock [which Bendy has only been taking more and more direct inspiration from while failing to grab any of the compelling parts] also had a lot of themes of religion and cult-ish behavior, almost every horror media franchise has at one point done a cult thing.

Bendy couldn't even come up with a reason Sammy worships the ink demon, the best motivation we've ever gotten is just that 'he's crazzyyyy the ink made him insaneeee'. Who is the cheap rip-off here?

At least Poppy Playtime gave their cultist a motive for worshipping the monster + a proper boss fight that feels intense and looks awesome! Bendy didn't even let you kill Malice [she got stabbed in front of you and then just collapsed on the floor how thrilling] meanwhile you get to kill three of the villains in Poppy Playtime and the gameplay and action in those scenes have only gotten better as the game went on.

I mean Sammy walks into a room and goes "AAA SCARY I'M BEING MURDERED" then later shows up and for NO REASON sees a normal human man and assumes it's the ink demon before once again someone else kills him for you. In Poppy Playtime you defeat Catnap as he floods the world with this horrible nightmare-inducing gas that intensifies the color palette and his design. Fight off versions of him that are illusions that you need your flare gun for, then watch in a wonderful animation as he mistakes the monster for his savior before getting killed by it, in a brutal way I might add, which game are we accusing of being cheap, lazy garbage again?

I just find this argument to be people who Really Really need to find a reason to hate Poppy Playtime which I think is silly. The devs being weird, shady people is already enough reason to dislike the game, you don't need to invent reasons why secretly every part of the game is malicious or bad. But esp when I see Bendy fans saying they don't support Poppy Playtime or dislike it bc of its devs or even saying its cringe ummmm.

I have bad news about the fact Bendy's devs are worse and it took not one, but TWO over an hour long videos to cover it all. Plus the Bendy games are just the worse games in every aspect, if I could sell my batim copy for a copy of Poppy Playtime I wouldn't hesitate at all.

Saying this as a bendy fan, we have no right to be super judgy towards Poppy Playtime. If Poppy Playtime is embarrassing cringe, Bendy is too and is way more embarrassing of an interest. We shouldn't spread misinformation just because we all want to hate Poppy Playtime, you can dislike Poppy Playtime without making up a bunch of nonsense to justify it.

Honestly seeing people just blatantly be unfairly mean to Poppy Playtime only makes its critics look worse and makes it hard to take any backlash to the games seriously. Because surprise surprise if you spread misinformation to make a point people will quickly stop listening to Anything you have to say bc they won't trust you're telling the truth anymore.

[esther-dot]

Half Jonsa here! Thank you Esther for your lovely reply! I hope to follow your blog until TWOW comes out too.

Well, I won't take up too much of your time, but to elaborate on my position, I would say it's overall because I take much more of a Dune influence in reading ASOIAF's themes and character work. Much of the story feels like a response to Dune almost more than LOTR beyond aesthetics-- I would almost moreso say that GRRM's criticism of kingship is more rooted in Paul and Leto II's stories than anything to do with Aragorn. This is just to give you a bit more of a picture of my approach, rather than get into the nitty gritty. I also saw another anon on someone else's blog point out Paul's parallels with Dany (where, topical to the colonising of her story, is very much in line with Paul's manipulation of the Fremen-- so I think this is likely to be critical, just maybe not in the usual fashion of modern postcolonial readings) but I feel that Paul's journey parallels many, many of the cast in different ways. You can pretty much see Catelyn-Robb as a direct response to Jessica-Paul. (Again, on the Dany-Paul Dothraki-Fremen note, I do think GRRM is less successful at giving complexity to the Dothraki, but nevertheless I do think we are meant to view it through a critical lens of personality cult-- this is what I mean about it not being postcolonial, but using colonial and conqueror aesthetics for an investigation of power and personality).

I said I was going to not take up too much of your time... to put it short, I have a much darker reading of the series-- not grimdark, pain for the sake of pain, but I do think there is a real meditation on the meaning of hope in the presence of cynical reality (which is a reality I'm not so sure is realistic, but it's there). I don't totally agree with GRRM's storytelling ethos and I find the series more interesting to talk about because of peoples' response to it as opposed to an actual discrete storytelling unit.

When it comes to Jonsa itself-- there are plenty of writings on its Romantic influence (cappymightwrite, you're a star), and without TWOW it's hard to say, but I think that its potential for a torturous Gothic romance which doesn't end in marriage is too high on the books for me. I'm particularly thinking of Paul's inability to marry for love-- his political marriage with Irulan is what gives him the universe on a platter. I know, I know, it's not fair to Sansa and I hate it, and it's not fair to Jon either, but I don't think that's the story he's telling. I don't think it is fundamentally about fairness, but that sometimes there are poetic answers to fairness, and maybe some justification which comes after the fact in songs and stories. I really don't want to write a treatise in your inbox, but when I say 'half a Jonsa' really I am trying to describe I don't think it's endgame, and that a lot of the theories/ethos which goes along with it are not what I entirely agree with.

Which is to say that yes, I do think Bran as God Emperor like Leto II (despite magic being 'evil', or potentially amoral, in my books) is a real possibility. It happened in the show, sure, but they didn't fully investigate the ramifications (and the specific commentary GRRM has on kingship--- specifically feudalism-- and what it means to make it 'work' with the tools of the fantasy genre). I think powderpowderblue might recognise my message because I've sent one before about Bran separately (sorry powder). I think there is a deeper contrast between Dany's magic and Bran's magic--- what sort of power gives you the capacity to rule, and how that compromises your humanity, or equally doesn't-- with Bran's own response to Dany's nukes. Bran and Dany have the potential to be even bigger foils than Jon and Dany, honestly.

You're totally right that there's a lot of room for different people in the Jonsa fandom, and I would say that by in large Jonsas are the most interesting (I say this with some impartiality, just because ASOIAF is not my main obsession) because they entertain the most different perspectives, even when they become committed to certain theories here and there. I think where I personally feel a bit reserved about it is because I think ASOIAF is less grim than Redditors think it is (and they miss the mark thematically) but I think it's much more grim than Tumblr by in large thinks it is (which is where I think the 'dark' love story of Rhaegar/Lyanna really shows. It absolutely is not a simple matter. That the great love story of the series is tragic and motivated by self-absorbed and egotistical prophecy, and involves just a wolf girl dealt the fallout? That says something really major about the storytelling's beliefs. I also don't think that Jonsa can be a straightforward poetic redemption of this). I'm just speaking generally; I'm even including non-Jonsas here. As a demonstration, I don't think Brienne is the complete thesis statement-- I think she is a suggestive antithesis, but not ultimate synthesis. I see her 'No chance and no choice' quote used as justification for ASOIAF's ultimate resolution (that heroism will be outright rewarded even when it's costly), but I disagree. I think there's a reason it happens in AFFC and not the later books (and more specifically, that she has been tied to Jaime-- not for mere chaste/courtly romance (this is also why I don't think it will be consummated), not to disillusion her, but to create a more complicated thematic synthesis).

This really got too long. Please feel free to not reply in longform or not reply at all... very therapeutic for me though hahahahahha!!!!! <3 <3 <3

P.S. Don't worry I love Sansa and Jon, separately and together. Part of the argument for Jonsa, I feel, is that they're such strong, Romantic characters separately who can bring out the most interesting personality from each other-- to recontextualise their previous characterisation. Imo the literary incentive here is really clear.

Don't be scared! I always encourage people to offer their opinions even if they’re unpopular.

@cappymightwrite is wonderful! I love her Jon as a Byronic hero metas, and I've really enjoyed @powderpowderblue's thoughts too! It's hard to resist the urge to be reactionary / go to extremes because of the incentives in fandom to do so, but I really appreciate the nuanced takes.

I did not read Dune, but years ago I read Hebert's essay on writing it, Dune Genesis , and I remember feeling a lot of dread because I was definitely getting some ASOIAF-y vibes from his ideas.

I agree with this, "there is a real meditation on the meaning of hope in the presence of cynical reality" and I think that is why Sansa stands out so much to me. The contrast of her beliefs with the world that wants to crush them. Even at her most cynical, she still is herself, kind, compassionate, she's such a joy.

I completely agree about Dany and Bran being foils! I've either answered or lost in my drafts something about that. I kinda think Dany works as a foil to each of the Starks in a different way.

"I think it's much more grim than Tumblr by in large thinks it is" I think I agree here. I would have gone more with...steeped in a deep sadness. Its only natural to be drawn to conflict as a writer, that's what drives action/plot, but Martin is particularly drawn to it imo. The pain and grief he writes into our POVs...it's all very moving, makes the happy moments that much brighter, but I definitely get the impression that's what he's drawn to. That doesn't at all mean there aren't good endings in store for some of our favs, but I don't think he'll make anything easy.

"That the great love story of the series is tragic and motivated by self-absorbed and egotistical prophecy, and involves just a wolf girl dealt the fallout? That says something really major about the storytelling's beliefs. I also don't think that Jonsa can be a straightforward poetic redemption of this" -- So, this is what I've been going around in circles on. Each time I answer an ask about Rhaegar I get a handful more because we all hate him but we all disagree on what Martin is doing with him. I think how Martin wrote Cat and Ned, one of the few healthy romantic relationships we get, indicates the extent of his interest in conflict/pain, so it seems inevitable that every relationship --Jonsa too-- would have that. I do think we're due for a romance that is more reward than pain which makes me hope though.

There's so much about a Targ/Stark Jonsa kinda has to be part of that convo, and I've heard people suggest that Sansa, unlike her younger self and unlike Lyanna, may fall in love with Jon but this time she will resist it which is why she will escape tragedy in the end. I don't buy that, but there are multiple ways Jonsa could evolve the convo, so I certainly don't dismiss your view. I personally am not into tragic love stories, but once Martin gave an interview and said he was, so I take that into consideration.

Brienne is the complete thesis statement-- I think she is a suggestive antithesis, but not ultimate synthesis. I see her 'No chance and no choice' quote used as justification for ASOIAF's ultimate resolution (that heroism will be outright rewarded even when it's costly), but I disagree. I think there's a reason it happens in AFFC and not the later books (and more specifically, that she has been tied to Jaime-- not for mere chaste/courtly romance (this is also why I don't think it will be consummated), not to disillusion her, but to create a more complicated thematic synthesis --I'm gonna have to sit with this.

Part of the argument for Jonsa, I feel, is that they're such strong, Romantic characters separately who can bring out the most interesting personality from each other-- to recontextualise their previous characterisation. --Love that!

Thank you for taking the time to write all that, and I'm glad you found it therapeutic. Feel free to share more of your thoughts anytime! 💗

[itsclydebitches]

I was once more thinking of vol 8 and other works to compare it to. I hit Harry Potter, specifically Order of the Phoenix. Literally all that happened there showed a much better "proactive Hero" and "Big Bad vs Big Good" battle that it feels unfair to compare. What say you Clyde?

It's been a very long time since I read Order of the Phoenix, but putting aside that and the series' problems with representation (something that always feels like it needs to be acknowledged when discussing HP nowadays), Rowling did a good job of setting up both motivation and justification for Harry's actions. Which isn't to say that he was never wrong — quite the opposite, especially in OotP — but that Harry's involvement in this war is justified in a way that Ruby's involvement is not. He's not just generally active (no tea sipping equivalent scenes), but we understand why he's the one taking that action.

Harry is an unwilling participant forced to fight due to a prophecy, so when he stumbles along the way, we as the reader are understanding because jeez, what else what he supposed to do? Literally no one else can do this and he's trying his best. Ruby, in contrast, is not necessary to this fight. We might have gotten that with her silver eyes, but we didn't, so when Ruby willingly steps up — or, in Volume 8, forcibly takes control — and then gets upset because things didn't go well, the viewer (or at least some viewers: us) are far less forgiving because she demanded this responsibility and then found she didn't like having it. When Harry rushes off to the Department of Mysteries, endangering many of his friends in the process (even if they volunteered) we understand that this action is done out of love. We've spent five books establishing Harry's desire for a family, it's literally his greatest wish according to the Mirror of Erised, so going after Sirius, while reckless, is such an in-character, relatable, human decision. It's integral to who Harry is as a person. Compare that to the lack of work done surrounding Summer and the unanswered question of why Ruby is fighting Salem. Because it's the right thing to do? Great, fantastic, but uh... that doesn't really explain or justify why she's leading the charge when all these other huntsmen — with the same goals, more experience, better plans, etc. —are trying to do The Right Thing too. When thinking about HP vs. RWBY, my mind always goes back to that moment at the end of the first book when Harry tries to tell McGonagall about the stone and she brushes him off. "Ah," I thought later. "That's why three 11yos are going off to save the magical artifact when there are adult, full-fledged wizards around to do it instead. The kids tried to turn hand this off to the adults and the adults failed them." Now, combine this with Harry's growing tendency to go it alone, the implication that Dumbledore may have been allowing him to face certain threats to get stronger, each book's individual situation like a hidden chamber that only Harry can enter, his Godfather being on the run, a magically binding contract that keeps him in a competition because the bad guys are specifically after him... Harry is at the heart of the story. He's integral to it, his part in the fight inevitable, so all that's left is to see how he bears that burden.

Ruby is not integral to this fight, her presence and even her silver eyes are not necessary, her facing down Salem is only inevitable from a meta perspective regarding expectations for a protagonist (and then, in Volume 8, Ruby didn't face her.) There's no clear personal motivation to drive her. There's not even a Guardian's of the Galaxy-esque motivation in the form of, "We'll step up because no one else will." Others do keep stepping up and Ruby keeps forcing them to follow her instead, insisting that her way is better. Only problem is, it's arguably not and that's when she has a plan at all. It's like if instead of going after the stone because his professors won't, or going after Sirius because he loves him, or going after Voldemort because a prophecy and a life of having a saving-people-thing has pushed him to that, Harry made his way to the front of this war Just Because, rejecting everyone else who fought in the first war, has more experience, and actual plans along the way. Why does he do this? Because his name is in the title of the book, I guess.

RWBY throws in lost of classic ideas and setups, but doesn't seem to understand their point. Even something as simple as that Big Bad vs. Big Good conflict in Volume 8. Putting aside how muddied this has gotten between the Gods' involvement and Salem's dip in the grimm pool, Volume 8 took the threat of our Big Bad arriving with an army and... ignored it. Instead, they ran with Ironwood as the primary antagonist of the volume, the guy trying to stop Salem, a previously established ally, the guy who just gave up his arm to capture another clear-cut villain, and who throughout Volume 7 demonstrated none of the manipulation we would attribute to a Dumbledore-like figure. Rather than running with their Big Bad's arrival, RWBY asked how they could force one of the good guys to become a bad guy instead, hence the sudden shooting of Oscar and murder of the councilman. This is a far from perfect comparison (and I take my virtual life in my hands bringing up another controversial character lol), but it's a little like if after we learned about which side Snape was truly on, he suddenly tried to kill Hermione, succeeded in killing a minor character like Professor Flitwick, and then made plans to destroy all of Hogwarts. Meanwhile, everyone is ignoring Voldemort standing on the front lawn because the narrative randomly made Snape the biggest problem instead. So a lot of the fanbase is like, "Yeah he's absolutely a dick and his horrific past/contentious choices are the point of his character... but he's also supposed to be one of the good guys at the end of the day? And the Big Bad is right there? We can argue about how 'good' Snape is until we're blue in the face, but he's no Voldemort. Why did you feel the need to chuck the morally gray character off the deep end for our heroes to oppose when our primary antagonist is literally right here, trying to kill them?" From this, to introducing a dead mother that in no way motivates our cast, to having Oscar face down Salem with an improvised weapon instead of Ruby with her eyes, to giving Penny an arc about accepting her android body only to rip it away, etc. etc. RWBY continuously throws out ideas without understanding what they're meant to accomplish. There's a lot to criticize about Harry Potter nowadays, but a lack of logical development isn't one of them.

And just to chuck in another text — because I too think about what has done Volume 8 themes better lol — consider: Loki. Stop reading now if you don't want spoilers, but a couple episodes in Loki and Sylvie end up on a dying planet that is only evacuating the rich. That's said overtly in both the dialogue and visually in the mise-en-scene, with poor people screaming that only the rich are getting tickets for the rocket and elaborately dressed elites enjoying the comforts of that ride. Then, just as they're about to escape, leaving the rest of their world behind, a piece of the moon hits the ship, either killing them instantly or stranding them with the people they abandoned. And I thought to myself, "See, this makes sense in a way RWBY never did." Evacuation was never about wealth in RWBY, despite what the fandom continually claims. Ironwood was trying to evacuate everyone and only stopped because they all assumed Salem would be killing them momentarily. This situation included Relics and a Maiden that would easily turn the tide of the war, meaning their safety influenced the whole world, not just these people. Mantle was not necessarily about to be destroyed — indeed, we find out later that Salem had no interest in it — and it was always a bad faith (and OOC) assumption that Ironwood was leaving his kingdom for good. The story doesn't even acknowledge the huge number of Mantle citizens already on Atlas when the attack begins. I was just sitting there thinking, "This two episode mini conflict in an insane show with alligators and time shenanigans somehow holds up better than RWBY's 27 episodes that are trying to be deep. How does that happen?"

[demoanais]

This will all be moot in a month but I feel like I'm in danger of being misunderstood so I wanted to make my position more clear for the record:

I AM happy Sharon is shown to be hurt, angry and cynical. She's more than earned that. EVC is perfect for playing with the dark side of her character, she has plenty of great experience to tackle that duality. Exploring deeper layers of Sharon is a welcome shift.

I AM happy that the show acknowledges that Sharon was wronged after merely doing the right thing and has long been suffering the consequences of a punishment that vastly exceeds the crime. Of course that's changed her outlook, how could it not?

I AM happy that Sharon has still managed to build a stable life for herself despite all this pain; she is extremely self sufficient and capable and takes great pride in that. It's the emotional blow that stings her the most - she has survived but it never needed to be this hard.

I AM happy that she didn't welcome sam and bucky with open arms and chat like nothing was wrong. She gave up everything and look where it landed her; they were being naive and insensitive to think she'd so happily jump back into the fray for their sakes with nothing more than a raised eyebrow.

I AM happy that despite her misgivings and distrust, she still lent her strength to sam and bucky's efforts because at her core, that's who she is. She hasn't lost her sense of morality even if her heart isn't exactly in it like it used to be.

I AM unhappy about the execution of all of the above.

For example, you have Sharon ask about new cap. Before bucky can elaborate, she cuts him to the quick by accusing him of blind loyalty to the mantle. But that isn't accurate. If bucky's so-called arc is anything, it's demonstrating how his insecurity and lack of direction are causing his grudges to overtake his better judgement.

For him, *everything* is personal. He was steve's friend before he was captain america's, and that's where meaning dwells for him. He doesn't want the shield back or blame sam for giving it up too easily because of some idealogical obsession with 'stars and stripes bullshit' - he thinks it's a slight to steve that sam didn't honor his choice and that it's more than just government issue gear to be passed around. It represents many things (many of them bad, as the show points out) but he doesn't care about all that. To bucky it may as well be a family heirloom, considering what little he has left from his former life.

Of course, this is all what he has to overcome, to (re) establish his own position and identity in the world, and sharon isn't as privy to those struggles as the audience is. Allowing bucky and/or sam to actually elaborate on their issues with walker could have created an in for her to point out some hypocrisy or naivety on their part. But the opportunity was swiftly torpedoed because we really, really need the audience to get that sharon 2.0 is 'awful' now.

So what could she have criticized bucky for instead? Lucky for her, that problem was looking her right in the face drinking her expensive liquor. There is very little justification for the stunt bucky pulled behind sam's back by freeing zemo, and I can only assume consequences are around the corner. Yet again, bucky isn't seeing big picture, he's consumed by his own personal relationship to zemo and the super serum. He acted unilaterally based on his own fears and self doubts but wants to present his actions as logical and well reasoned. Zemo can help in the short term, but what is the cost?

Sharon, being the seasoned cynic she is now, would have seen through that in an instant. How difficult would it have been to jab at the irony, bucky being 'free' according to his therapist but chained to this person who used him as a tool, who continues to exploit his weaknesses, who seems to be far more in control than bucky is in the situation they're all in. Bucky is trying to prove something, he doesn't seem to be sure what that is yet, but he's stubbornly blinded himself to the possibility that he's going about it the wrong way. That is something that sharon could have rightfully called out, but for some reason bucky's most egregious flaw is presented as.... being steve's best friend.

Then you have her dealings with sam, who's problems are more from the other side of the spectrum. He isn't really allowed to bring his personal feelings to the table, he has to deal with the intense pressure of taking on a loaded persona when it may not actually ring true to him in his heart. He also trusted steve and had faith in what that specific cap stood for, but does that mean he's willing to put the whole system on his own shoulders now? He's trying to think above and beyond, about the legacies before him, about his own place in history when all is said and done.

Sam is all about big picture at this stage, and his journey would presumably have him work from the outside in. That's why the glimpses of his family life are invaluable, they give us that contrast between his day to day realities and the loftier, more abstract idealism of the falcon's (or cap's) heroism. His exploration is about staking his own personal claim on the symbolism of that shield, not just for his own sake but for the sake of those who will now look to him as a leader and an inspiration.

To be fair, I think some of sharon's dialogue with sam is marginally better, but still ultimately misses the mark. I envisioned an exchange where she might belittle his decision to continue acting as a representative of the same organization that failed her so spectacularly, suggesting he should tread carefully lest he find himself discarded once the government no longer finds him useful or compliant.

She...sort of got close to saying that? If I squint really hard I guess? But it's off because it's less about the posturing and politics of their roles and of 'the machine' so to speak, than it is about striving to do right when you can. It feels like she's criticizing the inherent value of what they try do rather than the shortcomings of the framework itself. If I get vibes that this sharon seems to waffle on whether or not she regrets what she did in CACW, that's not a good thing.

Bureaucracy, red-tape, iconography - all of the things walker is being parceled with; can you disentangle yourself while refusing to leave the system in the same state as you found it? If I want to be charitable I can chalk this up to semantics, but they haven't given me many reasons to be charitable so far.

Then you have the whole utterly nonsensical bargaining over her pardon (the stupidity of that particular exchange pointed out multiple times on reddit, of all places) and sharon's not-so-subtle suggestion that sam is basically lying to her when he says he can get her pardoned.

If she's trying to say she doesn't believe he actually has the pull to accomplish that, or that he's underestimating how difficult it would be, it's one thing. But saying that he's merely 'pretending' to clear her name is completely unfair. I don't care how ~jaded~ sharon is, there's no plausible reason for her to consider sam capable of such a lie and I find that an insult to them both. Naturally, I place blame squarely on kolstad's writing, and not on sharon herself. It's plain as day he didn't give a wink to a single implication he made with his script, nor does he care to do so.

Am I foolish for thinking her arc could be handled with more coherence? I like to think I'm already controlling for the lackluster quality of MCU writing in general; this actually surprised me. I expect basic and juvenile, but at least there's consistency. Frankly, I think Feige put a little too much slack in the reins here and the characters are paying the price.

Could I be crying wolf too soon before giving everything a chance to pan out? Of course, that's always a possibility and I'd be more than glad to eat crow if things turn out palatable in the end. Are the odds favorable that this will happen? Magic 8 ball says don't count on it, and I'm not in the habit of constantly lowering my standards until they're miraculously met.

[lottalucamotion]

Stex Appreciation Month day 31: Nit Picks and What You’d Change

*Cracks knuckles*

Alright.

Once more this will be all text and no art since this is topic is probably better covered in words.

So basically I will be breaking down Stex into the way I would direct it if this was “Luca’s Starlight Express”. Some aspects will be full on changes, though most will just be a mix and match of aspects of different shows over the years that I liked.

So let’s begin this break down.

So first off I’ll talk about what seems to be wrong with Starlight and what the trends seem to show. I of course no nothing for sure, but this is just speculation based on rumors and little tidbits of information I’ve picked up on during my time in the fandom.

It seems like the biggest flaw that the show has is the lack of care, mainly by Andrew Lloyd Webber, for the show in general. While the show is heavily credited to have been created by ALW no doubt because he’s more the household name, Stillgoe is the one who really made Starlight what it is. Lloyd Webber was just reluctantly along for the ride. He was never fully on board with the idea of making Starlight a musical, and just intended for it to be a music collection for kids. It was to the point that ALW felt the need to put a disclaimer for critics saying that he didn’t really want to make it.

Starlight was always meant to be an audience entertainer, not a critic entertainer. From the minute it was conceived as a train musical on skates, it was damned to be crucified by critics, and well, the biggest issue with where it has ended up is the lack of acceptance to just let it be what it is.

This is not to say the show hasn’t always had some flaws. Where it seems to have always lacked is the story. It relied more on the spectical of being a series of being a roller skate show with music and races rather than a musical with a complex story and characters. Don’t get me wrong, this by no means implies the characters are not likable. The main cast has a lot of likable qualities even if they’re characterizations are fairly basic. In a sense this, give a chance for the audience to interpret the characters how they want. Though on the other hand it can also make the the main characters difficult to root for since their motivations are never really made clear.

In addition to that there are of course that matters of making certain characters out to be shallow stereotypes, and the critique that there is sexism in the story. Honestly, I think the poor direction in which the “fix” for the sexism critique is due to attention being paid too much to professional theatre critics who don’t actually want to give stex the time of day so they just say the story is sexist with no further elaboration, causing the direction to go blind into whatever the hell “I Need Me/Ich bin Ich” is.

Though not everything I would apply to my ideal stex is related to story. Most of it is just things are of no real consequence, just preference for this sequence or that song.

So now that this ramble is over, let’s actually get to the real meat of the matter.

I like the transition between the introduction of the nationals and Rolling Stock rather than starting with Rolling Stock.

I have a difficult time deciding whether Engine of Love should be Rusty’s intro or Call Me Rusty. I’m leaning more toward Engine of Love simply because I like that song more. Though putting in Engine of Love means that there won’t be any Whistled at Me variation. I would be okay with that even if I do love the pop version. Forgoing the “Dream Engine” plot point altogether honestly makes creating a more compelling characterization for Rusty and Pearl easy (Pearl’s dream train is a steam engine, and Rusty’s a steam engine so it just makes no sense why she would fall for and electric and diesel when she’s specifically looking for a steam engine).

So on that note let’s talk about what plot I have in mind for Rusty and Pearl. Pearl is a young excursion car who works around a lot of vintage engines for a luxury tourist line. Rusty and Pearl have known each other for a long time and promised each other that they would run their first race together.

While other engines are more inclined to be prejudiced toward steam engines, coaches find them quite romantic. However, Rusty’s physical state and the fact that he’s a switcher engine means that the coaches not only don’t believe he is capable of racing, but also believe it’s too dangerous for him. When Pearl agreed to race, she was not aware of how dangerous racing could be for Rusty.

Basically “Make Up My Heart” rewrite where Pearl makes the point that racing with Rusty could hurt him physically but she also doesn’t want to hurt his feelings.

It makes Pearl’s motives for leaving Rusty much less likely to be read as malicious, and makes more sense for their eventual romance.

As for Rusty, I prefer the writing going more toward how Rusty was originally written, more motivated to prove himself rather than racing to win over Pearl. Rusty’s reluctance to race coming from the fact that no one believes in him rather than just being rejected by Pearl. Obviously it stings the most coming from Pearl since the two of them were the closest, but she’s not the only factor. Maybe he even has thoughts that the coaches are right and he could get hurt.

Speaking of romances, let’s talk about Greaseball and Dinah. Dinah actions are likely the biggest sexism complaint source, and I won’t really deny that criticism. I get that we want everyone to get a happy ending at the end because that’s just the nature of this musical, it’s supposed to be light hearted and all. So if Greaseball and Dinah have to get together again, some justification should be given there, like implications that Greaseball and Dinah’s relationship beforehand is good and worth keeping even if just through the actors’ body language (like maybe Greaseball acting a bit more lovey-dovey toward Dinah in Pumping Iron rather than just having him treat her like all of the other coaches). Greaseball can still be a general asshole without being mean to Dinah. They can still have an argument about Greaseball’s cheating, but instead of having Dinah immediately backpedal to try to beg him out of leaving her, it should be an agreed action, where Dinah willingly leaves Greaseball as well as him leaving her. 

Greaseball should also at one point show some sign of remorse, maybe he notices her in U.N.C.O.U.P.L.E.D., watches her, thinks about it for a bit after she leaves, but shakes it off for the time being since he has a race to focus on.

Back on the subject of songs, for Lotta Locomotion, I’d love to see it with more subtle lyrics like “A Lotta Locomotion” but slap hard like “A Whole Lotta Locomotion”.

Bring back the original coaches. Yeah maybe Ashley is “outdated” and not PC but this is coming from the same people who put the confederate flag on the diesel gang and named the British Engine Brexit. I can’t fathom why they got rid of Buffy too?

I like all versions of ACDC and think what version would be best depends a lot on the voice of who’s playing Electra.

Red Caboose toaster hat edition - no Canoose. Also Killerwatt has no rights, I’d bring back the original components.

I actually really like the newer versions of the Rockies, I just don’t like the new Right Place Right time, the original version was the best in my opinion.

Even though I would include Caboose, I do like how Flat Top was given a more prominent story role without him, and would kind of like to emulate that.

Dustin should also be given more fleshing out in the first act, for example, having him sing “There’s Me”. While on one hand, having Caboose sing There’s Me gives more ways to think about his character, it just makes sense to give that comforting role to someone like Dustin (plus Dinah and Dustin being friends would just be the cutest shit ever).

Go back to the “Hey you” version of the Rap, none of this train Tinder bullshit we have now.

I usually hate the love songs in Stex but “I Do” is one of my favorite of all stex songs so that can stay as is.

Lastly,

Bring back No Comeback.

[ringmaster-jack]

Pass the Kerosene

[ An intermitted drabble elaborating on what occurred between Jack and his firebreather during the events in Early August.  It’s long as shit and it took me forever to write but I’m sick of looking at it so herE.  Preemptive apologies for all the god damn fire puns.  Also this drabble gets kinda dark and psychological-like so if you’re bothered by that kind of thing, warnings inbound. ] 

                                                        ♤ ♠ ♤ ♠

"What do you mean he's GONE?"

"I mean what I said.  He's gone.  He left."

The ringmaster clutched his face in his hands, a desperate and unyielding attempt to quell some of the disorganized jargon that threatened to spill from his lips.  It took him a few moments to collect his barrings enough to speak again without screaming, but even then, it was barely contained.  There was only so much one man could take over the course of a day, and there had been too many days like this over the passing months.  Chaos, change, danger and all that came with it; it was something Jack had more than accepted as a part of his life, long before he ever began his showmanship.  But everything was moving too fast, now.  Much too fast, and much too much of it, with repercussions he couldn’t even begin to unravel.  The way his brow tightened against the press of his roughened fingertips seemed to mark the coming of a nasty headache.

"What did you say to him.”

It took a hyper sense of focus, an ungodly shade of self-control for him to even manage one line to the woman in front of him without snapping like a territorial wolf.    

"What he needed to hear." Just one.

"...SERA.  What does that even MEAN?  WHAT THE FUCK DID YOU DO.”

Even if the sturdy-shouldered firebreather had wanted to respond to him, he didn’t really allow her the time with which to do that before he began flapping his jaws again.  Never shutting up was one of the ringmaster’s most defining features.  It was why a lot of the crowds he drew in enjoyed him, though to this woman, it was his most aggravating trait.  He never listened. 

 For a time, she allowed him to continue his yammering, though she felt herself not far from her own tipping point. Jack was the only one who could insight such a very specific and special sort of rage in her that was otherwise left unexpressed to their fellow carnies.  Amber eyes narrowed gradually the more she listened to him blather on, locked to his frantic and emotive pacing.  

"This is...bad. This is really really bad, this is not good this is a damned--catastrophe-- he can't--he has no place else to go, Sera, ANYTHING could happen to him--ANYTHING could just-- what, what was it?  What did you say to him?  WHAT DID YOU SAY? WHY? What the fuck possessed you to think that sending HIM --of all people--out-- THERE-- He was hurt, he--"

"He wasn't in critical condition. And he left on his own. He's a grown man, Jack, he can take care of himself."

"NO, HE CAN'T. HE'S NOT...THERE. MENTALLY."

"Okay, so then you took advantage of someone with a serious psychological condition.  That’s what you did, you haven’t done anything to actually help him. That’s pretty horrible, Jack.  You, you are pretty horrible. Y’know? "

Miss Seraphina Lefevre was many things, but she had never been one to pussyfoot about when it came to matters such as this.  For at least 5 years now she’d known and followed this man, which was why it came as no surprise to her when he turned on a dime and launched himself into her personal bubble to thrust her to the nearest tent rafter.  The framing of the big tops always held considerably sturdier than any of the personal tents, but even they shook with the force of his motion.    

"Don't you dare put that shit on me, Sera.  It’s not like--" 

The ringmaster didn’t have time to finish speaking before he felt a pain strike him where he touched her, a scorching heat that left blisters on his hands.  He should have known by now to never even try with this woman; the fire witch hadn’t even the need to struggle in order to get him to back down with a startled shriek.  

She pushed herself away from the pole she’d been so rudely knocked against, arms folding as she approached the man who by now had gotten over the momentary shock of having the first layer of his palm skin burned off. 

She spoke before he could finish, contemptuous and lucid in her speech, despite her obvious irritations over his lazy threats of violence.  Some people feared this man, but she knew him for what he was.     

"What is it like, Jack? Because from where I'm standing, this isn’t exactly out of your usual routine.  Maybe you’re invested in it now, but you know as well as I do you’ll eventually lose interest.  You always do.  You can go on and lie to yourself, if you want to believe you actually have feelings for him, then fine.  But it’s not the truth.  If you actually cared about him then you’d realize all you were doing was using him and playing games with his head. Hurting him. Like you do with everyone.  All. the time."

The heat that radiated from her person felt like stepping into a sauna, but Jack refused to swallow his pride no matter how many steps she took towards him.  He was sweating now, but his expression refused to crack under the very literal heat.  He was a stubborn sort.

"Why are you such a fucking bitch to me--”

"No, Jack. You're going to listen."

With every breach of distance, the showman's posture would sink.  Even with disregard to her firepower, this woman stood at a respectable and athletic 6′2″-- she was no delicate flower, and Jack, although he’d been healthier than in previous months-- was still not much of a match by comparison.  Not without his toys, or some backup-- and she was supposed to be his backup.  

"I don't care how much you think you want him. You do this every single time. You fixate on one person or thing and drain it of everything it has until there’s nothing good left."

"I don’t--want him, Sera, I need him--it was different with him.  I don’t know how to explain it, it just...I’ve never felt this way before.  You don’t understand-- you don’t-- get it.”

"Oh, I don't?"

Though she’d stopped moving toward him, her words were no less harsh than the fire in her veins.  Perhaps even worse, to one such as the ringleader.

"4 years ago, Cayri. Do you remember that name? 3 weeks of courting and one pregnancy later and suddenly you're not interested. She's madly in love with you but you push her away to the point of emotionally crippling her despite the child you left in her belly.  3 years ago, Scout. How about him? You certainly loved to push him around, and he was ready to give you the world, but whatever happened to him? You think he just--disappeared, Jack? He's probably dead now, and you don't even care anymore.  Left to rot somewhere in the catacombs for centuries, I’m sure of it.  2 years ago, Alice. Dead from an overdose on stimulants that you provided her with. She’d never done anything like that in her life before she met you.  2 years ago, Rosalie-- a prostitute and an addict now in the red light district.  She was in school to become a teacher before she met you, Jack. A teacher.  1 year ago, Khai. You--"

"Stop, stop-- just-- stop it. I get it.  I get it, okay?  What do you want from me?  I can’t control the way I feel. I don't know what to do. You don’t know all the shit I have to deal with Sera. I'm doing the best I can."

"THAT'S NOT GOOD ENOUGH."

Ah, there it was.  Her breaking point. One could only listen to the crying, blithering bleats of a spindly, insane man-child for so long before losing their cool. She never really had that much ‘cool’ in her, anyway.  This was made abundantly clear by the flames that danced between her fingertips a mere inch or two from the man who spoke, exaggerating her gestures in the most intimidating of styles.  Jack ducked away from each movement she made-- she wasn’t making any conscious effort to injure him, not yet, anyhow, but he could still feel his unshaven chin hairs singe when she got too close.  

"I don’t CARE if you’re trying.  You need to be better.  You need to be a better PERSON.   Your mental disorders aren’t justification to be a horrible human being. You ruin everyone you come into contact with and you don't even CARE.  You can’t just keep doing this shit every other month and going on about your business like it’s okay.  It’s not fucking-- okay, Jack.  There are consequences.  Maybe not for you, but for everyone else who has the fucking misfortune of having to deal with you.  If you actually care about anyone then get your shit together."

Silence.

  The ringmaster heard nothing from her that hadn’t already been reeling around in his own mind-- and pretty often, in truth.  It didn’t make it hurt any less to hear it out loud.  Although his eyes followed the fire that swirled within her calloused hands, he gave no real reaction to it, now, unblinking and motionless.  There was a stillness that followed before his voice made its reappearance, indignant and soured.  He turned up the collar of his coat, a small expression of anxiety that he rolled into with a hefty side step, away from his second in command and her judging stare.

"...If that's really how you feel, then why don’t you just leave? Just.  Go. Get out.  Go ahead.  I don't need you."

"I can't.  I made a promise. Unlike some people, I actually keep my promises."

"And what promise is that, Sera?  To irritate me relentlessly until I develop high blood pressure and die of a heart attack at the age of 42?”

"This isn't funny Jack."

“No, it’s not.  You think I’m joking?  Leave.  I told you to go.  That wasn’t a suggestion, it was a demand.  Good day to you, madam.  Au revoir.  You are dismissed.  Goodbye, I am tired of listening to your bullshit.  Do not pass go, do not collect 200 gold.  Make sure to leave your keys by the door.  Get the fuck out.”

This did not earn the look of shock or terror that the jackal had initially expected.  In fact, she actually laughed at what he’d had to say, and genuinely so.  It wasn’t because of the content in his words; though, and he knew that long before her merry sounds were quelled.  Even with the heat of her flames still twitching through the air, he felt his blood chill.

“Jackie...” the redhead began, her voice softened from its previous state of enmity.  Coming from her, that didn’t necessarily mean something good was inbound.  

“I do...at least 70% of your paperwork.  Most of the documents for all this?” She gestured around them, her fire leaving streaks of afterglow in the dim light of the tent. 

 “Most of this is in my name.  Just because you’re the poster boy doesn’t mean you’re the showrunner.  I got you here, not the other way around. This is my circus.”

Well... she had him there.  It was never something he’d actually thought about, though.  Ever.  In fact, it was such a distant concept in his brain that it almost felt as if he’d just learned it.  How was he supposed to come back from that?  He hated arguing with this woman.  He hated this woman, period.  

“Well...then...fine,” He was defeated.  He knew when to admit that.  But it didn’t mean the lanky showman was going to take his defeat lying down.  

Instead, he’d walk away from it entirely.  

“Then I’ll leave!  I don’t need this place.  And I especially don’t need you.  See how well this garbage runs without me, I’m gone.  I don’t have time for this.”

A dramatic exit was the goal, here, but yet again, the witch superseded that in an instant by way of magic.  Before the ringmaster could even get halfway to the door, he’d been cut off by a wave of fire-- if he hadn’t sucked in and allowed himself to stumble and fall back, it would have most certainly burned him.  The uncharacteristically high pitched shriek that came from his lungs would have been funny in other circumstances, but this wasn’t really that sort of moment.

 The fire that spread formed a ring around them, a cage of flame that suspended itself at a height that made it nigh impossible to take his leave.  He was more than just a bit upset, now.  He was pissed.

“No.” the fire witch exclaimed, her voice strong and unyielding.

“Sera, what the fuck?”

"Jack..."

Through the veil of flame, the fire dancer had coast towards the ringmaster, unscathed by the heat of her element.  She’d made a point to kneel down beside him, her hands to her knees to speak to the man as if he were a child. Jack rebound from his momentary startle and returned to a state of violent irritation in record time, his brow heavily knit in her direction. 

"Why am I here?" She asked of him.

"Well, presumably to make mon--can you please stop it with the fire?  My nuts are getting steam-cooked here, "

"No. Besides that."

"Because you enjoy making my life miserable?”

"Jack...”

“...Let me go, Sera, I swear to your gods...”

Seraphina didn’t seem to have any intention of dropping the firewall that surrounded them.  Even as the ringmaster tried to slip back on his rump, she stayed where she was -- it wasn’t like he could really go anywhere unless he wanted to burn.  The possibility of crossing the flaming barrier wasn’t completely out of his mind, though.  Especially when she began talking again. 

“She asked me to stay with you.  Tabitha. She asked me to keep an eye on you if anything happened to her.  To make sure you don’t get into trouble.  I’m basically your caretaker, Jack.  We’ve talked about this.”

“I can assure you we most certainly have not.”

“Three times.  I’ve discussed this with you three times, now.  You’re not...well, Jack.”

“No, but I’d be a whole lot fucking better if you stopped holding me hostage like some kind of fucking domestic terrorist.”

While his anger was mounting, the firebreather remained static, indifferent.  Jack had begun the task of pushing himself back up to his feet again, though with a brief curse beneath his breath when he used his scorched palms to do so.  He’d forgotten about that.  

 “I need to go, Sera, I need to-- I don’t have time for this, I have to-- find him, he could be--”

“He hates you.”

Although he’d begun pacing around the flickering heat that surrounded them to try and find a means of escape, the showman stopped in his tracks when she spoke again.  Of all the things she’d said to him, this was one he hadn’t anticipated.  He gawked at the woman with more confusion than antipathy, his forehead dripping with sweat.    

“...What?  What does that even mean?”

“He said he hates you, Jack.  The jester.”

“...You’re lying.”

“Do you really think he would have just left like that if I was making shit up?  I didn’t want to tell you that part, Jack, but you left me no other option.  You nearly got him killed.  The gods know what else you’ve done to sway him in the other direction, but he told me himself how he feels.  Not in...so many words, but-- just let it rest.  Persuing him won't get you anywhere.  You’re just going to make yourself even more miserable. It’s been a long day.  For everyone.  It’s time to give it up.”

Whether she was being honest or not, this new revelation was one that Jack hadn’t the mind to even begin contemplating.  He didn’t want to contemplate it, but he knew that the moment he actually had a second to relax, it would be the first and only thing he’d be able to ruminate on.  He felt a hollowness in his chest that crept into his belly like the sensation one felt when falling.  He didn’t like it.  Not one little bit.  

“...Okay.  Fine, just.  Whatever, I won't--I won’t go -- looking for him.  Please, just... take down your stupid firewall. I need to get out of here, Sera, I need to--”

“You need to calm down.”

“I AM CALM.” Hardly.  He inhaled sharply and shot her a glare that was even sharper.  Everything in him was tense.

“I have to feed Umbra.  Do you have any idea how much I’m trying to placate this absolute trainwreck of a situation that is my life without having a total and complete nervous breakdown?  Because frankly you’re doing nothing to help with negating that scenario, woman, so if we could just please please please continue this conversation later, I promise promise promise you, I won't-- leave, okay?  Scout’s honor.  But I need to fucking go.  Now.  He has to be fed before this gets any worse.”

“I’ll get him food.  You need to go rest.”

“You can’t give him what he needs, I--”

“I know, Jack.  I spoke to him.  He told me what you’ve been feeding him.”

“...You...spoke to him?”

“Yeah.  The night you got stabbed, actually.  I took him to a diner.  Bought him a milkshake and everything.  I know what he is, Jack.  It’s inconsequential.  You were supposed to stop--”

“I did--I did stop!  But I have to now, for him.  You don’t know what will happen if I don’t...”

“You don’t know either, Jack.”

She just wouldn’t let up, would she?  The fire still blazing around them, Jack pushed his fingers into his eyes-- not enough to really hurt, just enough to blackout his vision and show him stars.  He pinched the bridge of his nose after this, no longer even attempting to take his leave as he tried, tried to compose himself.  As was the case with most situations for the ringmaster, he knew that the only way he was likely to get out of this was to smooth talk his way to the end.  But he hadn’t felt this angry in a long, long time-- and when he opened his lips to try and convince her again, all that came out was a bitter, tired,

“I fucking--hate you.  I hate you so much.”

The firebreather had pushed herself back into a standing position, if only to keep on level grounds with the ringmaster.  She’d remained unphased by the lazy insults or Jack’s penchant for traipsing the tent floor, something that had started again, like a caged lion.  When she spoke, it was much calmer than it should have been.

“I think you need to go back to Zaun.”

He halted in his tracks, but only to look at her.

“What do you mean?”

“I mean you need to be hospitalized again if this is how things are going to be with you. In the past half a year alone you’ve almost died at least 5 times, you’ve happily invited an assortment of demons and malevolent spirits into our place of work, endangering everyone in the process, you’ve murdered an unknown amount of innocent people to use as sacrificial fodder to a literal dark god-- do I need to go on?  Because I definitely can, you’ve also-- ”

“Shut up.” he hissed, his voice barely a whisper.

“You’ve made it crystal clear to me that you’re a danger to yourself and to others.  You need things that I’m not capable of providing.  With the record you have, getting you involuntarily committed is a non-issue, Jack.  But I’d really rather have your consent.  You need help.  Please recognize that.”

“You don’t know what you’re fucking talking about!  They don’t help anyone there, Seraphina!  They make everything worse!  Exponentially!  Do you know what they did to me in there?  Do you have any fucking idea--”

“I’ve been given a basic summary of your history, yes.”

“Then you know it won't make anything better.”

“You’re being dramatic.”

“NO.  NO I AM REALLY, REALLY NOT.”

Incapable of finding an exit within the ring of fire, he turned back to the flame dancer instead, her self-righteous attitude and confident stare doing nothing but fueling the anger that bubbled in his stomach.  He wanted to approach her, to scream in her face, or worse-- but he knew any attempt at fighting this woman would probably end poorly on his behalf.  Especially if what she said was the truth.  So he continued speaking, instead.  Aggressively and with a bit too many flippant hand gestures, but maybe she’d listen.

“2 years in that place was enough.  They kept me so doped up I could barely function-- I’m only just now remembering bits and pieces of it, Sera, but I don’t need to remember any of it to know the shit they do in there-- it’s not fucking good.  By ANY stretch of morality!” he exclaimed, to which the witch seemed apathetic.

“They don’t heal people there, Sera, it’s where you go when no one else will take you anymore.  They just lock us away with disregard to any kind of human dignity and throw away the key.  They do things that would never fly anywhere else in the world because nobody actually gives a fuck about people like me.  Do you understand where I’m going with this?  I don’t know what misguided garbage my sister funneled into your thick fucking skull, Seraphina, but I’ll tell you right now--her whim isn’t worth the trouble.”

“It’s absolutely worth the trouble.  I loved her, Jack.  And she loved me.  And regardless of what you think, I’m not your enemy.  You’re like family to me, now.  I just want what’s best for you.”

My gods, the emotional rollercoaster they’d been on over the course of the past 15 minutes was one for the history books.  Now, it was the ringmaster’s turn to laugh.  It was a cold sound that built up from a soft chuckle into a half-exhausted but deep-bellied cackle, one he made zero effort to hide.  It made the elemental hesitate; if only for a moment, shifting her weight to the opposite foot in discomfort.  When he looked at her again with a shimmer in his eye, that hesitation grew.

“Is that really what you think?  You think she actually loved you?  Oh, honey-- if that’s really what your whole life has been based around for the last 6 years, do I have some sad news for you--” 

She’d wanted to interrupt him before he spoke again, but she didn’t get the chance.  His body lethargic in the heat, Jack floundered his way in her direction-- though this time there was no intent to try and assail the witch.  His cruel smirk betrayed his intent.

“Tabi didn’t love anyone.  You think I’m bad?  At least I have the capacity to actually feel something.  I fucking hate it, but it’s a thing, no matter how much I try to ignore it, y’know?  Her, though-- all she ever cared about was power.  Progress, at any cost.  What she thought was progress, anyway. She’d do anything if it meant furthering her ‘career’.  She slept around a lot more than I ever did-- you were just one in a long, long list of others.  I really don’t think she wanted you to babysit me with my best interest at heart.  She never really did care what happened with me.” The bitterness that hung on those words was enough to crumble his facade of egotism, at least for a moment, before his speech would continue on, more somber than before.  Sera was left to her own rumination for those few protracted seconds.  

  “If you’re really telling me the truth-- if you really do care about me, then.  Prove it.  I made a promise to you, and I don’t intend to break it.  But I need.  To go.  And you need to trust me.  Please, Sera.  I’m begging you.”

The firebreather knew that Jack had a way with manipulating people in his favor, regardless as to whether he was in the right or not.  She was one of the few mortals who had lifted that veil and seen the ugliness beneath the surface.  She didn’t buy his bullshit, not for one minute-- but in the stillness of the evening, with only the sound of her embers crackling in a coil around them... she saw some sincerity left within this filthy but charming man she’d followed for half a decade.  Maybe it was something in the way his eyes gleamed with unshed tears, or maybe it was the sheer exhaustion in his voice.  She didn’t know at that moment.  He’d hit her in places that were much more damaging than the scorch of any flame ever was.  Things weren’t adding up.  

“...Fine.”  

Jack let forth a triumphant but passive ‘woo!’ when the intense temperatures that surrounded him where uplifted in a flicker of hot ash.  He knew better than to bolt immediately, so he took a moment to wipe the sweat hanging from his skin with the sleeve of his jacket, and offer her his graciousness.  Of course, the almost sardonic tone to his voice belittled that sentiment, now that the danger had been extinguished.  

“Thanks, boss, you won't regret it, I--”

Well, maybe not extinguished, so much as... muted.  Temporarily.  

His words garbled by the sensation of the firebreather taking clutch to his throat, Jack’s own hands instinctively moved to try and grab her arm-- a poor choice, as it only reignited the sting on his palms.  Her grip was so rough that the tips of her ruby-polished nails left crescent brandings around his neck.  Speaking was nearly impossible when you had a fire witch strangling you, which had perhaps been her intention.

“But let me make one thing clear to you first.”

Her amber gaze left holes in the man’s skull.  Jack did his best to avoid eye contact, but the panic in his expression was undeniable.  

“You’re not a hard man to track down, Jack.” 

That was all she said.  Nothing more, nothing less. One cryptic line that would stick with him in the coming weeks, though the burns on his neck would fade in a matter of days.

It didn’t take the woman long to release him, giving him the freedom of speech again-- but it took Jack a moment to compose himself through the fit of dry hacking.  He managed to rasp out a passionless, 

“Okay,” 

to her statement, though nothing more came for a minute still. Fire mages were never any fun, and though it was in his nature to poke fun of her for her amusingly heated temperament, he toned it down.  For once in his life.  

“I’m... leaving now.  If you want to dance again later, you know where I’ll be.  Thanks.  I suppose.”  

It was an anticlimactic ending to an incredibly intense night, enunciated with wounded pride that he did his best to uplift long enough to carry out the door with him.  He was no gentleman, but Jack would still do the bare minimum to at least present some sort of dignity, whatever that meant in his mind. It was a fine note to end on, he pondered, as he knew somewhere in the back of his thoughts that this was far, far from over.  

The stench of paranoia lingered in the air beneath the saccharine smell of late summer.  It hung itself heavily on the evening breeze that kissed the showman’s wet skin when he stepped out of the big top.

[jinjojess]

Jess Talks FE3H

I had a Thought the other day that I shared on my Twitter, and @goldstarzzz asked for some elaboration on it. Since Twitter sucks for nuanced, long-form discussion, I decided to type it up on my blog instead (though the draft I was working on during my trip home on the train has been lost twice because of annoying reasons I don’t want to get into now).

Be forewarned that I’m gonna be verbose here, so this shit will be long.

Obviously, we’re going to touch on some FE3H spoilers, so be aware of that.

I haven’t finished any of the routes yet, but there’s something that I want to discuss about the game--namely Edelgard and how if you aren’t on her route you get very little in the way of context for why she does the things she does.

While on one hand, I like how realistic that restricted perspective is, since in real life you don’t know the motivations and past experiences that have shaped a person unless you actually do make an attempt to engage with them and get to know them, and it fits in nicely with the themes in Three Houses of how history is written by the winners, everyone is the Hero of their own story, and conflicts are not Good vs. Evil so much as clashes of worldview/agenda between groups of fallible individuals.

However, the fact that you don’t get any context at all from the other routes does Edelgard dirty as a character, and is where we get these tiresome, dumbass takes like “Edelgard is literally Hitler” and “Edelgard just does things for no reason” from fandom members who are only engaging the narrative on a superficial level. 

(As an aside, there’s nothing wrong with just taking a narrative at face value, but you do have to give up any claim to commenting on its non-subjective quality if you do that.)

And I mean yeah, if you’re on one of the other routes then it does kind of seem like Edelgard’s heel turn comes out of nowhere, rather than a steady, uneasy build to an eventuality. In a game where you couldn’t get close to her beforehand and see the dominoes lined up along the fault line, as it were, this would be Bad Writing (e.g., Monica/Chronia), but you can take the time to hear Edelgard out and listen to her justification before that happens. She’s a playable character with an actual route, which is a big departure from the usual villain.

The things Edelgard is fighting for are objectively good: eliminating the aristocracy; disrupting the Church’s unquestioned authority; dismantling obsession with crests and fate and birthrights. She’s a trauma survivor who wants to help people who have been hurt and destroyed by the machinations of the Rich and Powerful. 

Her methods may not be ideal, but honestly, is she doing anything any different from anyone else in the game? It’s possible she does and I haven’t seen that yet, but so far the things you do on her route aren’t much different than the things you’ve been doing all game already, just under the banner of Seiros. Sure, you have no emotional connection to the NPCs from the East or West Churches, but that doesn’t change the base fact that you’re still going out to exterminate them at the behest of someone who outranks you.

Edelgard and her route’s existence is a challenge to the status quo of Fire Emblem--it makes the player question the usual set up of Good Guys vs. Bad Guys, makes you stop and wonder if hey, maybe all these brigands you’ve been hacking through have the same level of interiority and charm as the characters you’ve been playing as.

The problem with this is that Three Houses is still a Fire Emblem game. Yes, what you’re fighting for is ostensibly different, but the way you get there is identical: kill off the Enemy until they run out of guys on the map. So even if the point is that Edelgard’s goals are lofty but her methods are unacceptable, the entire theme goes belly up since Claude and Dimitri are basically using the same methods. Unless they have some mechanic I haven’t heard about where you can diplomatically resolve conflicts, they are functionally identical to Edelgard with regards to what they actually do. 

This dissonance between the themes and the mechanics reminds me a lot of Pokemon BW, with N and Team Plasma. They’re positioned to address the elephant in the room re: Pokemon’s base premise, but then because they’re restricted by the mechanics, every dispute is resolved with a battle, which kind of undermines the whole thing. Even N, who is depicted as the one who most sincerely believes in pokemon autonomy and rights, still battles you to prove that battles are unethical.

Is this realistic in that many real people will use noble goals as a smokescreen for their actual, more selfish agenda? Sure! But while that applies nicely to Ghetsis and his little cult, N feels more like he’s intended to be an anti-villain, someone who Has a Point Actually, and you should critically examine your actions in-game. It’s far more powerful when the antagonist isn’t actually wrong, just different from you, and it’s a shame that N had to sacrifice some of his integrity as a character to fit into the format of a Pokemon Game.

Going back to Edelgard, while I’d 1000% percent be down to be able to play from the perspective of someone who’s manipulating people under the guise of social reform, that a) doesn’t seem to be the intention, and b) doesn’t really fit with the other themes of moral relativity. If you make Edelgard a Bad Guy but Claude and Dimitri Good Guys (or Neutral Guys, even), that doesn’t really say much about the nature of conflict.

So it seems like Edelgard should be just as sympathetic as the other two leads, yet there’s some really troubling things in the way. 

For one, the fact that she’s a noble herself and the heir (later Empress) to vast resources, including a military that unquestionably heeds her, makes her crusade feel more like condescending Noblesse Oblige rather than a revolutionary uprising. There’s a kind of scummy appropriative element to it that is difficult to ignore, especially since you have Dorothea right there, who’d make a much better figurehead for this movement than the heir apparent to a goddamn Empire.

(Side note but Edelgard also has the misfortune of being a literal Imperial, which in today’s society is not a connotation neutral thing. Being from a “kingdom” or an “alliance” is quaint, but “empire” has become such a staple trope for villains that it’s not even surprising that she’s the one who heel-turns. Add in the fact that Hubert is presented the way he is, and it becomes really obvious which of the Three Houses is going to be the Problematic One. Fire Emblem just can’t help being itself, even when it’s toying with more mature themes.)

But on an even more general level than that, Edelgard’s convictions get a bit undermined when her goal is “stop the powerful from using the less fortunate as pawns” but all of her victories happen thanks to...putting her social inferiors in mortal peril. 

Like yeah, right after you choose to side with her (and she manages to get over the vapors that induces), she has that moment where she appears to be cognizant of the paradox, but I somehow feel like her route isn’t going to end with her dissolving the Empire and handing off all the power to the populace.

She can’t, because this is a Fire Emblem game, and in Fire Emblem games, you win the war at the end. There’s a heavy cost, of course, and we’re all going to have a moment of silence about it, but there’s still a victory and a happy ending when it’s all said and done.

Obviously, if this doesn’t happen at the end, and all four routes (including the Church one) close on a Pyrrhic victory or something, then I will stand corrected and be very pleased. However, my money is on the standard happy ending that conveniently ignores that the common folk are going to be feeling the effects of the war long past any of the privileged, powerful people in your game.

So yeah, that’s my thoughts on how I think Three Houses took some really interesting steps toward being more nuanced, but still gets tripped up on its identity in some ways. Given the way the narrative is set up, this ends up affecting Edelgard way more than the other characters.

Thanks for coming to my Ted Talk.

[theonceoverthinker]

Season 3 Overview

Another season has come and gone. And now that the season is over and I’m all Smash Bro’d out, it’s the perfect opportuni-THREE to talk about it! XD

Season 3 was a whirlwind, but in the best way possible. Once Upon a Time really took this season to come into its own, blending the real emotions of a drama with the fantastical elements of a fairy tale. And with two seasons of developed dynamics at its back and the buildup of having all of our main characters finally on the same side though still with the same qualities that allowed for real and interesting conflict, this was shaped up to be an incredible season.

And what an incredible season it was!

Damn, it feels so sad closing the book on Season 3. Look, this is my favorite season, both critically and emotionally and rewatching it only proved that twice over for me. In terms of its final score, it got 94%, the highest of the three seasons I’ve reviewed so far. Additionally, HALF of the season scored Golden Apples, the highest honor I can bestow on an episode!

So, with all that, what more specifically did I like about it and what (if anything) went wrong? Well, let’s get into it under the cut with our Pro/Con lookback!

Pros

The Concept of Belief - Often in other seasons, belief is something that acts as a platitude and while it doesn’t bother me as much as other platitudes on the show, it wasn’t especially effective either. However, Season 3 did something different. Here, belief was made both tangible and intangible. To elaborate, it’s more than a meaningless platitude. It’s belief in something real and exuding the energy to make it happen. In Neverland, believing in each other was a strong point and that belief came through trusting others that they normally wouldn’t in pursuit of a grander cause (Saving Henry). It’s the belief that everyone wants the same thing and that there might be some strength in the others’ mindsets. This continues in the Wicked Witch Arc and it’s the reason why Regina is able to defeat Zelena with light magic. This concept is present all throughout the season and the practical terms and language that the characters use as well as the actions that follows them transforms that belief into something that can actually be used to solve problems rather than something vague that is just said because it sound right. It’s like Tiana’s dad says in the opening of “The Princess and the Frog,” wishing is only half the deal. You have to make the rest happen and by trusting each other, that’s exactly what the Nevengers did.

Villains – Season 3 had the best villains, plain and simple. I wrote an entire essay about Pan and I wanted to write one about Zelena, but to put it simply, both villains had big and hammy personalities that made them intimidating and memorable, strong connections to our main cast that allowed for them to be characters in their own right with a thematic presence, strong effects on both the plot and story, interesting motivations that lent themselves to high stakes, and satisfying defeats and “deaths.” Rebecca Mader and Robbie Kay both additionally contributed performances that positively OWNED their interpretations of The Wicked Witch of the West and Peter Pan. They were intimidating, but at the same time, had their own bits of charm that still made them villains that I wanted to see on screen. Like, they still did terrible things – their villainy was never questioned – but at the same time, I never felt an urge to fast forward past their scenes because it was so engaging to watch them do their things.

Redemptions – I feel like I could talk so much about Rumple, Regina, and Killian’s individual redemption arcs in Season 3. There’s this understanding among the writing staff of the people these characters are and what they want them to be and with that cohesion, they put their all into making that happen this season. Because of that, all three characters got emotionally satisfying developments that were carefully built up over eleven episodes. And, what I like about these developments is that those changes did account for bumps in the road and allowed for some pretty sensible deviations from those roads to redemption. At some point in the season, Rumple, Regina, and Killian do villainous things to some degree that take their redemptions down a few notches, but it doesn’t undo the work they’ve done.

Cinematography and Locations - I feel like Season 3 was the most diverse the series ever got with its locations and camera work. The camera work this season allowed for the locations, moods, and characters come alive. Storybrooke has such a rich geography and so often in later seasons as I was watching this one, we don’t get to see it. The mirror shot lake stands out the most to me and I want to give out more honorable mentions, but…well, this is why you don’t wait so long to do an overview XD! But if you’ve read my reviews, then you know that there were too many locations that I called pretty and amazing and I feel like it’s a failing that a lot of locations in the coming season just stick to the some of the more common places. The woods never look so beautiful afterwards.

Cons

Walsh’s Framing - ...Look, I had very little to complain about this season. Thematically, shit just came together nicely. BUT there was a failing or two, as small as they were and Walsh’s was a really small but strange fuckup. Like, Walsh is supposed to be framed as a bad man who got his just desserts by being turned into a monkey and later killed. The latter part of this works well enough since he does attack Emma before he dies, but the former half…well, it doesn’t. Glinda’s justification for finding Zelena’s punishment of him to be appropriate is that Walsh promised hope he could never fulfill. The only thing is that in the one instance of Walsh being the Wizard that we see, he is not only helping Zelena, but gives her something that physically allows her to do what she wants them to do, only asks for a payment as an afterthought, AND advises Zelena about her jealousy, which is just needed advice for her. He’s not shown to be callous or make unfulfillable promises. He lies about his abilities, yes, but how he keeps up his ruse still enriches the lives of others, and if it’s not, it should have been better shown. Have Walsh not give the advice, or maybe set a deadline for when Zelena has to get the item from Rumple. Like, make him more of a douche! As it stands, I just feel bad for Walsh and hope he moves on to the better place in the afterlife.

The Island of Machismo - This isn’t a critique of Neverland, per se, but dammit, this aspect of the arc was just frustrating! It feels like if one was a male in this series and present on this island, they got affected with a bug far more dangerous than Dreamshade: Machismo. At least once per episode, the men of this show would argue over something stupid for no other reason than showing that they’re a “real man” to either their opponent of the object of their affections. The dumbest example was of course the lighter fight in “Dark Hollow,” but dishonorable mentions to a lot of David’s behavior prior to and during “Good Form” and the attitude of the Lost Boy’s at Pan’s camp. Just...it really shows that this show was made by guys and as a show that normally doesn’t do this, it’s really disappointing.

...And honestly, that’s really it. As I said, in terms of broad strokes, this season gave me very little to complain about. While some episodes or scenes were off in either their framing or the sturdiness of their stories, they were more or less one offs!

Okay! Now that we’re done talking about some of the season’s less than stellar qualities, let’s go back to talking about the good shit again! That’s right, it’s time to talk dynamics! Now, like last season, these are in no particular order, and that’s because...well, when you spend the better part of two weeks playing Smash Bros, you kind of forget some of the intricacies of dynamics and thus which ones you think are better! XD But honestly, there were so many good ones this season that I could’ve extended this to a top ten without even trying (Honorable mentions go to Emma and Regina, the Charming Family, Zelena and Regina, Regina and Snow, and Killian and Henry).

Captain Charming - Killian and David’s dynamic is mostly a dynamic that develops under the surface, save for “Good Form” where it’s given its day in court. What I like about it is how David’s never portrayed in a negative light for his distrust of Killian. It comes from a sensible place given Killian’s misdeeds, but is still shown as something that he’s better off for moving on from. And Killian’s struggle to get his approval is not without its merit. Killian’s real effort is portrayed. Additionally, they have a nice bit of snark between them. Seeing these two guys grumble as they work together and comment on their budding friendship is funny and quickly becomes endearing as the snipes become just a little kinder over the season. I finally want to point out how David warming up to Killian is one of the few instances of The Island of Useless Machismo failing in that regard as by the end of “Good Form,” they trust each other enough to let the fucking toxic masculinity go for half a second.

Swan Believer - Believe it or not, a lot of what makes the Swan Believer dynamic so good is the fact that Emma and Henry are separated for so much of it. Through each other’s absences, we see so much of their feelings for each other come through. That’s not to say I like them apart but every moment that that was the case, we saw further just how much that separation made Emma determined. Henry blatantly informs every decision she makes and allows for her character to explore her magic, understanding of morality, and identity. And in the latter half of the season, we get this fantastic mix of frustration and love from Henry as he deals with the truth being kept from him. He knows his mother has his best interests at heart, but every piece of information that he knows isn’t being shared and every time he’s left on the sideline proceeds to make him angrier. And on Emma’s side, no matter what her approach is to where she wants to be, what doesn’t change is how much she wants Henry with her. But when they are together, we see just how close the two of them can be. “New York Serenade” has so many great moments where we see a possible life that Emma and Henry could’ve had and they’re so emotionally comfortable and aware of each other. One can understand why Emma wants to return to their simpler life upon seeing how cozy they were in their New York apartment. To summarize, the Swan Believer dynamic was one of the most subtle and loving dynamics of the season and I happily ate it up!

Regal Believer - Like with Swan Believer, so much of the season doesn’t involve Henry and Regina being together. But unlike Swan Believer, they get a different means of development. There are certainly similarities between the two, but I want to focus on what makes them unique. First, I’m gonna do that by pointing out a similarity! XD Just like how Henry’s absence informs all of Emma’s choices, the same can be said for Regina’s too. She puts up with the Charmings for far longer than she normally would like to, explores the type of role she can play in the group dynamic (A mentor to Emma’s magical skills and a willing user of dark magic), and faces off against all manner of dangers without a moment’s hesitation. Her determination is so fierce that one can completely understand when she’s had too much of the group and needs to hit the highway. And of course, I have to touch upon the “Save Henry” flashback. We really see that for as much growth as Regina is doing and for as much remorse as she has for her sins, she can never fully regret any of it because she loves Henry that much and we know exactly why. He gave light and purpose to her life and was enough that she was willing to put herself at a disadvantage in order to give him the love that he deserved. And that love, while held back by  two seasons of villainy, finally gets to show itself from Henry’s side. Now that Regina’s doing better, Heny reciprocates her love fully. And in the latter half of the season, watching every small interaction between the two of them as Henry doesn’t know his mother, but still really likes her company is so heartwarming and makes the moment where he reclaims his memories and they break the curse together a moment of utter triumph. They fought so hard to be together and now that they are, I couldn’t be happier.

Pan and Rumple - I could go on and on about Pan’s dynamics with practically all of our mains, but let’s focus on the best one. Rumple is a character so steeped in nuance that one has to wonder about his origins. With Pan, that was partially delivered on and so effectively at that! Pan is an utter monster who knows every one of Rumple’s buttons to push and partially because he laid the foundation for some of them. Even as Rumple tries to be noble in order to save his grandson, Pan presses those buttons relentlessly and without mercy, no matter if it comes at the cost of destroying his son’s confidence or severing Rumple’s tepid connection with Neal. Nothing is sacred. And Rumple reaction to this is fascinating as well. His hatred for Pan is without question present, but at the same time, Rumple is not entirely immune to Pan’s powers of suggestion. He nearly falls for the fake Belle’s scheme and when the doll first shows up on the island, Rumple meets it with tears. With the possible exception of Cora, no villain has ever intimidated Rumple like this before. And watching Rumple have to use every supply in his arsenal to take Pan down as it culminates in Rumple realizing the sacrifice he must make is such an integral part of his character growth this season. And every time that happens, Pan just becomes more and more of a threat to the audience. It’s a dirty, disgusting, and utterly despicable dynamics that they share and I love every second of it.

Rumple and Neal - I feel like Rumple and Neal’s dynamic really gets the attention this season that it deserved last season but didn’t get. While their time together was shorter, every second of it counted. Neal’s distrust of Rumple really gets to be explores and it was further kicked into high gear as a result of the urgency of their mission. Because Henry was taken, both an initial alliance was able to take place and in the same breath for that same reason, destroyed. And then, it was rebuilt. Rumple and Neal’s reconstructed parent/child relationship is so satisfying for me because Rumple really has to earn trust back from a situation that he got himself into. That entirely deserved bitterness on Neal’s half is given the attention it’s deserved in an entire episode dedicated to it as well as a few follow up scenes in future episodes. And it’s brutal. Nothing is held back as Neal tells Rumple exactly how he feels and why he’s worried about a chance at betrayal and every word cuts like a knife. Because of that, the moments when Rumple disproves those doubts feel so satisfying to behold and the ensuing reconciliation is applause worthy.

Okay, not that all’s been said and done about dynamics, it’s that time again! Yes, it’s time to tackle the best writer of the season! And may I just say, this season was FANTASTIC for everyone! We had TWO writers get a perfect score and A&E were just one point off from joining them! But as they did not, let’s crown our winners!

And the best writers of Season 3 are…

Christine Boylan and Robert Hull!

Both writers finished off the season so remarkably! When looking back at their work, not only did every episode get a 10/10, but ALL of them received the Golden Apple, a score I reserve for episodes of exceptional quality and a first for writing accomplishments for this rewatch. These are classic episodes like “Save Henry,” “Think Lovely Thoughts,” and “Snow Drifts,” as well as two new absolute favorites of mine like “Nasty Habits” and “The Tower.” All of these episodes have powerful and effective themes, compelling character interactions, and risks that take the story to new heights.

Well, that’s everything for you. We can close the door on this season and move on forward!

So now that Season 3, often regarded as OUAT’s best season (By myself included) is over...where do we go from here?

I love the Frozen Arc, and I’m really excited to watch it again. In fact, I’ve already started it, and I just finished reviewing “White Out!” XD The Frozen cast rocks, I get some fantastic dynamics and storylines out of it, and it feels quite balanced. I’m also excited to start this season as well because this is the point where I started watching the show live when it aired and because of that, I think my reviews and rewatch will transform into more of a discussion of my experiences and changes with these episodes and less as basically reviewing them for the first time. As you’ve already noticed if you’ve been reading my most recent reviews, I’ve condensed the format so that I can spend more time focusing on the core elements of episodes.

That said, I know there is a drop in the quality of OUAT going forward. I’m positive, but not naïve in that regard. That also having been said, I’m going to go into this new season like I always do: With anticipation for the good! And I hope you’ll be there to join me!

Thanks as always to @watchingfairytales and @daensarah! See you all...well partially through the next season! XD Puns, critiques, and gushing galore await you there!

[garbandier]

Child Please: Concerning the Pyszczyk Maneuver

“Human memory is like a scribe laboriously setting down letters while his left hand erases the text of the past. Every generation knocks together its own apocalypse and utopia and, confident in its own powers, believes its utopia and apocalypse will come off exceptionally well, unlike any other, will be final.” —Zbigniew Herbert, “Passo Romano.” The Collected Prose: 1948-1998 (pp. 651-652). HarperCollins. Kindle Edition. 

The mind, like the human face, is a pebble on which the stream of time exerts tremendous powers of revision and change. I love creeks and the places that nourish them. Few occupations delight me more than stopping in some leafy cloister to consider the subtle arts by which time’s whimsy alters the rocks in a stream. In wheeling, whirling courses of silt and sediment, in teeming eddies and gurgling little pockets, the pebbles in the stream are constantly prodded and perused, tested and turned, worked on and prised and pushed by the patient fingers of the water. Heavy rocks and sunken logs and broken branches cluttering the stream are massaged by detritus and flowing sediment and whatever else the churning waters may choose to marshal as a persuasive tool. The stream’s hands exert their influence quietly beneath a calm surface glazed with floating leaves and spidery skimmers. The water might spend a hundred years smoothing a single stone. Or instantly the stream might give in to greed and gorge itself on a chunk of earth from an overhanging bank, or snap a mossy log and ferry it to some new position. 

Eventually, the artistic collaboration between time and water rearranges the small stream-things and the large stream-things, and what emerges is a new pattern of movement, a slightly new direction for the whole stream. The water’s work changes the rocks, but the story does not stop there: the changed rocks change the stream in turn; alterations in the stony bed change the course of the stream itself. The new course changes the rocks in new ways, and so forth.

The human mind is altered by time, but time itself is baptized by contact with the imagination. The imagination amplifies how we experience the past: we can gratefully imagine how things could have turned out much worse than they did. Conversely, we can choose to torment ourselves with the power to imagine how much better life could have been. But the imagination can also make the future seem inhabitable. The person for whom the future holds no imaginable significance is likely to enjoy a less meaningful present. 

As someone who wrestles with depression, I have real sympathy for anyone who considers the future likely to be desolate and uninhabitable. Nor am I surprised when bleak assumptions lead to bleak opinions and bleak paintings. But I must try to cast a critical eye on such assumptions when they arise in my own mind. And when bleak surveys of the future form the basis for drastic calls to action, I wonder exactly how did it happen, this shriveling of the imagination, this inability (in the words of poet Dana Gioia) to “dream of a future so fitting and so just / that our desire will bring it into being.” 

What follows are some scattered thoughts on a recent opinion piece by Kristen Pyszczyk positing an ecological mandate to procreate less. 

Pyszczyk takes as her starting point the announcement by Fixer Upper stars Chip and Joanna Gaines that they are expecting their fifth child. Pyszczyk notes an online backlash against this announcement, and says she was surprised:

Not because I disagree with their critics, who admonished the couple for having too many kids, but rather because it's a sentiment so seldom heard in a society that generally celebrates procreation with almost militant cheerfulness.

I am amazed by Pyszczyk’s apparent struggle to understand why people celebrate procreation so much. Complaining about some taboo against “criticizing parents for having too many kids” would be like Westboro Baptist Church members grousing about a taboo against protesting military funerals. Society has no need for taboos against notions that can only bubble up in the mind of someone predisposed to extreme zealotry. How pleasant it is to imagine that disagreements stem from the irrationality of others. If one’s position meets widespread unpopularity because of a “taboo”, an “almost militant” sentiment, or an “uncritical” contagion, then surely one is excused from the risky task of scrutinizing one’s own motives too closely.

While having a child or five is a very personal choice, it's also a choice that affects everyone who inhabits our planet. So while many people might find the backlash unwarranted, it's actually a conversation we need to have in order to challenge our uncritical acceptance of the life-fulfillment-through-procreation story.

Pyszczyk employs the term “conversation” three times in this piece, but she uses it as a euphemism for whatever is the opposite of conversation. She seems to have no interest in persuading anyone through dialogue. She advocates calling people out for having lots of kids and shaming them into having fewer kids (henceforth will I refer to this as the Pyszczk Maneuver). Oh, I don’t know; a conversation centering on being shamed and called out just does not appeal much to me.

Procreation is becoming a global public health concern, rather than a personal decision. So when people do irresponsible things like having five children, we absolutely need to be calling them out.

The only noteworthy ecological effect of “calling out” parents with lots of kids as “irresponsible” would be to befoul the atmosphere by exposing one’s own toxic asininity.

Someone who might be inclined to have children, yet who chooses not to in order to help the earth, has my admiration for incurring so real a cost by acting in a principled way. That person also has a measure of my sadness, because I imagine the path they choose to walk may be very lonely at times. I say all this as I walk my own lonely path in life. 

Pyszczyk writes:

Population control is a fraught topic, and carries with it associations with eugenics and other nasty historical events. But we still need to talk about it, and people who reacted strongly to the Gaines' pregnancy announcement know this on some level. It's not an exaggeration to say that the survival of our species depends on it.

Population control is not merely associated with “nasty historical events” like eugenics; population control was the animating principle for the perpetrators of those atrocities. Indeed, the history of population control alarmism is a long train of abuse and hubristic overreach. Today’s theories remain tainted (inescapably, to my mind) by the heinous stank of odious and cruel social projects like eugenics and one-child policies, not to mention the spectacularly failed predictions of famine and devastation made by the likes of Thomas Malthus, Paul Ehrlich, and others.

By no means should past abuses and quackpot tendencies invalidate concerns about humanity’s impact on the natural world. Quite the contrary. Likewise, just because every so often some kook hauls himself out of a dank pit and decides to predict the date of Doomsday in the name of the Lord, his kookery has exactly zero bearing on the truth claims of Christianity.

I am troubled by the way Pyszczk glosses over eugenicist and racist aspects of population theory. She claims that “the survival of our species depends on” population control. If the situation is that dire, if [cue cinematic music] the fate of humanity is at stake, then what possible justification can there be for not forcing people to procreate less or physically winnowing the population? If a certain number of babies truly is too heavy a burden for the earth to bear, then would not the ruling authorities actually have a moral obligation to forcibly reduce the population? I do not see how a person’s choice matters if humanity truly hangs in the balance. 

The Pyszczk Maneuver will never persuade anyone who is not already amenable to its logic. Its core problems are ethical and evidential, but the message of the Pyszczk Maneuver also faces an impossibly steep public relations battle. Hectoring an extremely well-liked celebrity couple for having a baby seems like a fine hill to die upon. 

I see no way to argue for a reduction in people without inviting an array of half-sarcastic replies like “which people?” and “you first.” To argue in any respect for “fewer people” is to first plant in my imagination the seed of a person’s existence. That hypothetical person acquires real weight in my mind, and for me to then wipe that person out of existence would be participation in a hate crime against otherness.

“Now,” Pyszczk writes, “as a feminist, I tend to oppose any cultural conversation that involves telling a woman what to do with her body.” Pyszczk then constructs an elaborate rationale for why she feels comfortable telling other women to have fewer children. Such moral contradictions will arise in our wacky hyper-modern world, where people still want the narrative satisfaction of eschatological meaning traditionally provided by religion, but not the burden of having to be traditionally religious in respectable society. So one cobbles together one’s own sources of narrative meaning. When one’s personal vision of Utopia fails to materialize, the next step is to seek the consolations of Apocalypse. Some amount of pricking and poking seems inevitable when you inhabit an epistemological nest of your own making, cobbled together with any contradictory twigs and scraps you could gather. Pyszczk senses two sides of her values coming into conflict and cannot really reconcile them.

People crave justice. They see nature ravaged and tortured under rack and screw and forced to give unreliable testimony, and so where nature cannot speak the truth, people rightly cry out for justice on her behalf. I lament all plundering and exploitation of the earth and its creatures, and I question my preference for ways of living that insulate me from the claims of nature and leave me blind to the goodness and sheer fragility of natural life. I affirm the need to steward and protect ecological resources. But the Pyszczk Maneuver seems obviously counterproductive. I can scarcely imagine a more efficient way of alienating people against the environment than by shaming them for their desire for children, all on the basis of extremely flimsy speculation. And I do not see any way to argue for an ecological mandate to have fewer kids without shaming people who have or want to have lots of kids. 

Concerns about ecological justice must be grounded in humility, given the overwhelming complexity of being. “All the efforts of the human mind cannot exhaust the essence of a single fly,” declared Thomas Aquinas over seven centuries ago. The more attention I pay to the small things in my midst, the more voluminous they become and the more they absorb me. The more I look at a thing, the more substantial thingness it seems to possess. 

Think about the early days of microscopes. Can you imagine how wonderful it must have been for a man of learning to peer through a microscope for the first time and see the world with a whole new perspective? What a rush of blood to the brain; what intellectual vertigo it must have been. The seventeenth-century poet and mystic Thomas Traherne looked at a common housefly under the glass and what he found was a marvel beyond marvels:

The Creation of Insects affords us a Clear Mirror of Almighty Power, and Infinite Wisdom with a Prospect likewise of Transcendent Goodness. Had but one of those Curious and High Stomached flies, been Created, whose Burnisht, and Resplendent Bodies are like Orient Gold, or Polisht Steel; whose Wings Are So Strong, and Whose Head so Crowned with an Imperial Tuff, which we often see Enthroned upon a Leaf, having a pavement of living Emrauld beneath its feet, their contemplating all the World…the Infinit Workmanship about his Body the Marvellous Consistence of his Lims, the most neat and Exquisit Distinction of his Joynts, the Subtile and Imperceptible Ducture of his Nerves, and Endowments of his Tongue, and Ears, and Eyes, and Nostrils; the stupendious union of his Soul and Body, the Exact and Curious Symmetry of all his Parts, the feeling of his feet and the swiftness of his Wings, the Vivacity of his quick and active Power...

Life overpowers me with plenitude. Perhaps Pyszczk and I simply inhabit mental worlds too radically different to be bridged: while I stroll down to the neighbor’s barn behind my house, she aspires to the rings of Saturn. The small world of a backyard, a neighborhood, a sloping hill, a patch of woodland—to me these are places replete with possibility and mystery. Just yesterday my little world was transformed with snow, and the tree outside my window filled up with cardinals. I spent hours watching dozens of fat red males and dappled gray-brown females bustle and perch and fuss and feed.

I could not say for sure how moving a handful of pebbles from one spot to another might affect the course of a flowing stream; what, then, is there to say to those who would not blush at reducing human life to carbon footprints and doling out blithe judgments on which person’s future should or should not be blotted out? What algorithm or cost-benefit analysis or predictive model can possibly account for the ripples in time that may emanate from a single human life, let alone whole groups of people? What wretched slide into cultural glaciation must the people of Iceland undergo in order to systematically annihilate people with Down Syndrome through abortion? You may bend the direction of the stream to your will; you may change the way the water moves by rearranging the rocks and the sand and the dirt; but you cannot account for the way the stream will change you in return.

[sharkiegorath]

@almaviva90​ thanks for mentioning That Article, the only thing that can make me write coherently rn

I mean, God, if it’d just been called an underwhelming/bad show that would’ve been, like,  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯, it’s your opinion, buddy. But personal bias aside, singling Finn out of all the characters in the series, especially the Scotland Yard arc, is??? It’s compounded by how the article doesn’t actually give any reason for why he’s included, unless you count ‘he’s like this one iconic character except not I guess’. So I’d like to examine the subconscious processes behind why Finn is listed as a Great Character while everyone else - cast and character - is disregarded, especially since positive reviews pinpointed the ensemble effort.

anyway I took this as an opportunity to Go the Fuck Off suddenly synthesizing loose scraps of information I’ve had for some time so bear in mind

“The folks who did stick with it mostly stayed onboard for Bertie Carvel’s Finn”??? Where are you getting this information? Since 2014, positive reviews and tweets mentioned the ensemble. For mediocre-to-negative audience reactions, I’d say there was a 50/50 split between people saying they only continued to watch for Bertie versus only continuing to watch for Brit. I’m pretty sure social media suggested there were more people who started watching for one actor then ended up immersed in the overall series.

Anyway.  Anyway.

The reason the article loosely gives for Finn's impressiveness is silly in the first place. Yeah, he's superficially like Malcolm Tucker, they're both spin doctors who go on shouty elaborate tangents. If it's been done before, why's it interesting? What distinguishes Finn so much that he's not just a clone in a different, allegedly weaker setting - which shouldn’t be worth listing - and how can he simultaneously be so similar that the explanation relies on preexisting knowledge of Tucker? 'He's even less charming' isn't a good reason, because intensifying one trait doesn't necessarily make a distinct character. (And based on what I've seen, isn't Finn less intense?)

Oh, and the fun thing is, that implied reason why he’s a stand-out character isn’t that accurate in the first place.

Firstly: we’re socially conditioned to identify with nominally straight white men, even (especially?) when they’re jerks. We create justifications for them in the absence of explicit excuses; we perceive complexity while oversimplifying other characters, even if we feel positively about them. But I’ve seen enough mediocre TV to think Finn is above-average. Until Ep. 5, I was partially willing to view him as complex because I believed everyone else was complex, and everyone else had interesting dynamics with him. I watched along with the original C4 airing. In terms of ‘sticking it through’, no, I didn’t watch just for Finn, and I had only watched the pilot for Bertie. Finn didn’t seem *that* important in the first two episodes of the main series, it looked like he might leave in the third, and his characterisation from the fourth onwards was tied to the overall plot. It was only subsequent marketing that gave away his prominence.

The article mentions (and dismisses) Bertie Carvel’s own opinion on Finn. (Which may have been paraphrased by the interviewer, but was probably still sympathetic.) He's realistic about his characters' flaws, including unambiguously sympathetic protagonists, including those who try to take advantage of institutional injustice. For him to say something along the lines of Finn not being that bad, Finn probably isn't. Babylon takes place over around a month, under uniquely stressful events. Since Liz's escalating issues make her act 2edgier and more unpleasant than usual, I think it's fair to infer that Finn is also not acting entirely like 'himself'; we don't have anywhere near the amount of context about his personal life as we do for Liz or Richard, but we do see his seemingly stable preexisting workplace relationships. Whether any of that justifies his behaviour is up to personal interpretation.

In Babylon, lack/introduction of context is juxtaposed with the transparency debate. (Actual Critic Genevieve Valentine also noted the narrative style, I'm not desperately bullshitting here.) It's ironic having characters argue about transparency when they aren't honest about themselves. It's not a mystery show, but mundane-yet-important details about main characters' personal lives are revealed suddenly, sometimes as surprises to the audience but not to other characters, sometimes as shocks to everyone. When characters learn more about each other and adjust their opinions, they themselves become more sympathetic in the process because it parallels audience reaction. I'm insistent that the series - specifically the Scotland Yard arc - is a team effort because otherwise Finn is just an asshole bouncing lines off people who don't verbally respond half of the time, and that's amazingly boring.

There isn't much evidence that Richard is a good person or Commissioner besides the word of his best friend and an infatuated woman he barely knows. He mistreats both of them in some way. He’s not mean to his family, but he's mentioned and shown as verbally abusive towards subordinates. Delgado may have had a point, since every other hint he gives to Liz is reliable. Yet the overall audience is probably more inclined to perceive Finn as the most-likely-to-be-abusive character, even though the only evidence is A) his interactions with Liz (who's matched him since day one; arguments aren't inherently abusive and they’ve started to Calm TF Down by the end) and B) his annoyance with Tom, which only peaks in the last two episodes.

Why does this happen? Because early on, Mia says Finn is an ‘arsehole’ - never mind how they usually seem to get along. (The only time they clash, his anger isn't actually directed at her.) No one paints a heroic picture of Finn; he describes himself through fictional villains or less-than-anti-heroes. He's not charismatic like Richard. He uses big words and has a severe gum addiction. Those 'undesirable traits' are subconsciously associated with being a white collar villain, while the obviously wrong actions of police characters aren’t as strongly vilified.

Audiences are so conditioned to expect certain story beats or clichés that we automatically assume they exist, or that there's a strong connection between things that aren't inherently linked. It happens with Liz, who might be negatively viewed the way Finn views her, or through a stereotypically rose-tinted ‘strong female character’ lens. It happens with Finn...who becomes most prominent as he’s part of the arcs of white women and a Black man. In his specific case, is that why the other characters aren't interesting, while he mysteriously pops out like a fucking daffodil in the middle of a desert? After Richard dies, only Finn could possibly fit what the protagonist of a satire 'should' look like, if you shut one eye and thought satires can't be humanist and pretended you didn't see certain scenes and turned off your deductive reasoning.

The worst things about Finn are his casual -ism’s and active role in the institution. I wonder if they’re the Bad Things identified by people who view him as an archetypal career-driven sadist, or if they come to mind at all. He’s not manipulative or a jerk as a default, he’s not motivated by money or power for its own sake. He’s arrogant and abrasive - that’s the rule in his setting, not the exception. Yet he mentally registers as a flat archetype at the cost of recognising his actual pressing issues. Not seeing his deeper issues undermines his dynamic with almost every other character - which, if you’re using him as a reference point, maybe explains why they might not appear as compelling, just maaaaybe. 

The trickiness of contextualization is specifically linked to Finn, who’s implied to have some sort of literary background. (Thanks, inexplicable Shakespeare bust!) In another interview, Bertie says Finn would describe himself as a ‘realist’. Finn occasionally brings up facts, but his concept of realism revolves around how other people construct their own fiction. (A neat thing about how Liz and Finn usually communicate: she ‘sells’ ideas, he gives mini narratives.)

It’s impossible to guard Richard while being honest about him or the police. Finn is opposed to Liz’s policies because their ‘story’ doesn’t hold up to scrutiny. He also romanticizes the job, but it’s in a Byronic way instead of straightforward heroism; he knows the truth is ugly and gives people more reasons to hate them, so he thinks they might as well control the narrative while they can. He frames his job as a gritty morally grey drama to justify himself - but it’s the wrong ‘genre’ and he fails to salvage their image anyway. Liz and Inglis have idealized, somewhat self-righteous perceptions of the institution, but they don’t use it to justify really bad things; their morality overrides conventional logic several times and it turns out to be the right thing, or the least wrong thing. They’re the only ones who remotely gain something they want by the end.

The emotional climax or whatever of Finn’s largely background arc is quietly admitting that he needs Liz, that her approach might be better than his, and encouraging Inglis’s interest in transparency - an interest that’ll likely have a long-term impact. Finn’s cynicism begins to recede and it’s largely dependent on them; he represents the shifting status quo, he’s an indication that they succeeded in some way. So he’s quite obviously not static and he can’t exist as effectively as an isolated entity therefore, bite me, Digital Spy.

[nevinitambay-blog]

Close Reading *The Secret Life of Pets* (2016), or: That feeling when adults let clichés fly in kids movies.

Hey, everyone! I hope you all had a good week of writing and getting something useful from recent news (perhaps by using last week’s technique on analyzing spin)! This week, I decided to take a recommendation from the subreddit /r/NetflixBestOf instead of rolling a die or watching a movie I’d already seen. So, without further ado, let’s watch The Secret Life of Pets.

 Right out of the gate, it is obvious what formula this movie uses: the new friend that the main character didn’t initially like. It basically folds out into these plot points:

 1.      Established life is good, perfect, even. (Movie opens on the perfect life of Max and Katie.)

2.      New element in life is introduced and disrupts the established flow of things. (Katie brings Duke home.)

3.      New element is rejected, undermined, and abused, with the justification being that the new element is bad. (Duke steals Max’s bed, eats out of Max’s food bowl. Max retaliates by blackmail.)

4.      Things get out of hand, forcing the established and new element to work together. (Falling in with the Flushed Pets.)

5.      In the process, established element realizes how tough the new element’s life had been. (Max and Duke learning about the death of his previous owner, Fred, and Duke being picked up by animal control soon after.)

6.      Established element accepts new element. (Duke saves Max from animal control the second time. Max then saves Duke from drowning in the animal control truck.)

7.      The good life is reobtained for main character. (Max and Duke waiting at the door for Katie.)

 Well, that’s a wrap, everyone! That’s the extent of storytelling in this movie. Go forth, find a formula, and write the thing. Here are some notable formulas you can try using: Christopher Vogler’s “The Hero’s Journey”, Michael Hange’s “Six Stage Plot Structure”, Robert McKee’s “The Quest”, Linda Seger’s “Story Spine”, John Truby’s “Twenty-Two Building Blocks”, Syd Field’s “Paradigm”, Blake Snyder’s “Beat Sheet” (Save the Cat!), David Trottier’s “Magnificent 7 Plot Points”.

 “But, Nev, this is a comedy. Surely you can tell us something about comedy writing.”

 I mean, I could, but this isn’t the best as base material for an explanation as it went with formulaic clichés for its comedy as well. Everything is slapstick (Chloe the cat falling off a curtain and animals running from a vacuum cleaner), or opposites (the gang leader is a fluffy bunny and the classy dog headbangs to System of a Down), or a shallow observation on life (the people missing what the animals are doing by being on their cell phones and the Flushed Pets being composed of several alligators and a tattooed pig), or an exaggeration on the formula the movie uses (the bricks that crushed the viper catching on fire and the alley cat having a British accent). Basically, you can emulate the comedy from this movie by observing a bunch of stuff, criticizing one third, emulating another, and flipping the stereotypes of the last.

 “Nev.”

 Ugh, fine. Ok, so a lot of what we find funny are the things that defy our expectations in unexpected ways. This can be done through something as simple as a mixed metaphor (“we can stand around talking about it until the cows turn blue”) or something as complex as an entire plot revolving around trivial things becoming incredibly important, and vice versa, (think The Importance of Being Earnest). Each of the methods for comedy relies on one major thing: the status quo, the structures by which we operate and understand the world. It is funny when we joke about the inconsistencies of Islamic dogma when referring to terrorism, because we are making jokes when seriousness is required. Roasts are funny, because they exaggeratedly criticize people who aren’t usually criticized. Monty Python movies are funny, because a bunch of other people also paid $8 to hear fart noises in a theater during the opening credits. Fluffy bunnies running an underground gang is funny, because “small”, “cute”, and “fluffy” are not traits we regularly associate with gang leaders.

 Honestly, I can’t say much more about comedy writing. There are theories in both psychology and literary studies about what comedy is, as well as a boom in people categorizing themselves as comedians, but there is very little structure or analytic categorization that would help me explain it. The best advice I can give you at this juncture is to write down what you find funny, then figure out why you found it funny. Please note that the more you analyze the less you find things funny.

 Getting back to the movie and close reading techniques, here are the things I found funny and why:

 ·         Max has a naïve understanding of the world and his owner’s actions. This is funny, because we understand what is actually going on and that his naivety won’t really result in negative consequences for him. (For example, we know Max is a pet, not a roommate.)

·         Both Gidget and Max say that they have busy plans for the day then proceed to do nothing. This is funny, because we see that what they say is not what they mean, probably as a result of social conventions and niceties.

·         Chloe rejects her food dish and goes after refrigerator food once her owner leaves, yet faces no repercussions. This is funny, because she is being a jerk to her owner yet her owner doesn’t seem to register that or care.

·         The yappy dog, Peppy, stops yapping and becomes composed and direct once his owner leaves. This is funny, because we usually see those dogs as derpy, not clever enough to get up into a hanging plant.

·         Mel is clumsy and goes through an elaborate setup for a chair he leaves multiple times in order to yap at squirrels. This is funny, because the dog puts a lot of effort into setting up a chair he doesn’t use and yaps at squirrels that he can do nothing but yap at. Also, he doesn’t react to almost knocking things over or running into things, which is what we expect to do.

·         Leonard, the poodle, switches the radio from classical to hard rock and headbangs to it. This is funny, because we assume fancy dogs of fancy owners would prefer fancy things.

·         Chloe bounces off of a table and chair in the process of coming into Max’s apartment, then lands on her feet and goes to immediately sit in a box. This is funny, because the clearly clumsy cat is graceful enough to land on her feet, and she chooses to sit in a box that is much too small for her.

·         Mel naively describes a trip to Florida in a plane, then says he would probably eat a pill again if it were covered in peanut butter. This is funny, because we know what really happened and the naïve dog just displayed enough awareness to know that he is tricked into eating medicine with peanut butter.

·         Chloe chases a laser pointer after batting away the ball for the dogs to chase. This is funny, because she has enough awareness that animals chase silly things but not enough to chase a silly thing herself.

·         The ball worship is funny, because it is a naïve view of things that we know is opposite of what is true (i.e. there are probably millions of balls like that, because we mass produce them, not just one like Max says).

·         Duke sits on Max in the process of stealing his bed. This is funny, because that isn’t where butts go.

·         Max gets no sleep, understands possessions, and is kept awake by Max’s snoring. This is funny, because a dog is having human problems.

·         All the animals have awareness of pet stereotypes, but no understanding of humans and how things actually work. This is funny, because it is contradictory and shouldn’t work that way.

·         The old dogs grumble about a kid throwing a ball with a launcher instead of his arm after the movie has a scene where a taxi driver misses Max hitting his windshield because he was on his cell phone. This is funny, because we assume dogs would react to new technologies similar to the way we do when that may or may not be the case.

·         Gidget takes the telenovela seriously. This is funny, because she is taking a silly, overdramatic thing seriously.

·         Animals beat up the dog catchers, which is a reversal of roles. This is funny, because it is the opposite of what we might expect.

·         The Flushed Pets form a gang (a serious societal issue that we are having trouble dealing with) that is opposed to the domestication of animals (something trivial no gang that I know of opposes). This is funny, because it defies our expectation of a gang being serious business where people die.

·         Gidget befriends a hawk that tried to eat her. This is funny, because it defies our expectations that predator and prey aren’t usually friends.

·         The bars on the sewer are snakes that ask for a password after showing they can be moved past. This is funny, because it is unexpected (bars aren’t usually snakes and snakes wouldn’t be very good bouncers/gatekeepers since they are small and slender).

·         Tattoo reveals that he was used in a tattoo parlor as a practice canvass. This is funny (and sad), because it seems unnecessary for tattoo artists to practice on a resource-requiring, probably-squirming pig.

·         The viper is crushed multiple times with the last chunk bursting into flames. This is funny, because it is poking fun at the common critique of believability leveled at fiction writing were dogs and cats talk and abandoned animals form gangs. Also, it pokes fun at the overkill sometimes used by writers to make sure certain popular actors or characters can’t be brought back later.

·         The bravest dog is the fluffy princess who watches daytime television. This is funny, because it is the opposite of what we’d expect. (She also climbs to the top of a pyramid of shelves by going through it instead of the clearly easier route of climbing up the outside.)

 As the movie goes on, it forgoes funny for sentimentality and drama, and what is funny is a rehash of stuff I’ve already listed a variant of, so this is a good place to stop. (Please share anything not on this list in the comments!)

 I would make a pun here about comedy being in the eye of the beholder, much like beauty is, but I don’t want any of you delving a dungeon to go looking for comedy. Happy writing!

 What did you think of this week’s movie? Did you find a new technique for storytelling or comedy writing in it? Do you have questions for me? Is there a movie you would like me to write about? Let me know in the comments! I look forward to hearing from you! I post new articles on Wednesdays. Please remember to upvote, like, subscribe, and/or follow me on other social media if you find these articles useful and want to see more!