#it's just that i've never seen anyone express this exact sentiment. with seeing the character in your minds eye sorta
Explore tagged Tumblr posts
Text
You ever finish a drawing that you really like and then you spend the next three days randomly looking at it for minutes at a time like that could make it possible for you to absorb its alluring and magnetic essence with your eyes
#this is me with my icon rn. also this is silly but yeah it really feels like that#i experienced the same thing but even more intensely back in february with the short comic i made then#and then also with some of the paintings i made during my painting course days#admiring the colors and lighting on this mundane green bottle. why not#honestly this might be the first time in my life when i'm making things and i sometimes end up actually liking them fully#no little extra gripes with it that could ruin it. i just like the thing as it is. love it even. it's exactly as it should be#this feeling is one of the top things that make drawing and overall at least attempting to make art worth it#i also wonder if anyone else experiences this thing where the image of a certain character stays in your sort of visual imagination sphere#like the thing becomes associated with everything that happens at that time. the music i listen to etc#it almost feels like i sort of AM this thing. like. spiritually#ok this is hard to explain without sounding kind of odd LMAO#it's just that i've never seen anyone express this exact sentiment. with seeing the character in your minds eye sorta#i mean hmmmm. ofc fursonas and all different types of sonas and such exist. re: the identification thing#i actually find the concept of an 'avatar' as something that represents you (in a digital setting mostly) really intriguing#it was actually one of the things i seriously considered as the subject of my bachelor's thesis#but yeah ok i'm just saying this so that you all know that i AM that little purple kitty holding a heart. btw#ok i'm going to go eat dinner now. don't mind me and my strange long-winded monologues#goosepost
9 notes
·
View notes
Note
wait i'm curious, what makes you say that gregor doesn't like everyone else (if i read that post right)? just curious since i've never seen anyone else say that
i don't necessarily think gregor dislikes everyone else at lcb but i do think that gregor is an incredibly petty person that isn't nearly as close to the rest of the sinners and even outright dislikes some of them cough cough rodya cough cough which a lot of people just Refuse to see because he's as much of a doormat as he is. there's several examples i could get into to try and prove my point however i'll just focus on what i personally think to be the biggest ones.
additionally, this is going to be kind of long, so i'm adding a read more. read more! read it. sorry for being so wordy. i have several diseases.
Pt1. gregor is the type to try and get along at least decently with everyone, especially if he gets a good first impression from them.
this is less a point in favor of gregor's distance w/ the rest of the sinners and more just a contributing factor to it. once again there's several examples i could point to here but i think the most in your face one happened in canto I with yuri, as several people have pointed out. even before gregor comes clean about growing attached to her as quickly as he did because she reminds him of his sister, we get this interaction.
i'll go ahead and make the disclaimer now that i don't necessarily think gregor is the most reliable of narrators, especially when it comes to his feelings and interactions with most people, but from the way he acts when the topic of yuri comes up (and the way we still see him act even all the way up to c7, nearly a whole year after yuri's death) i don't see reason to question his sentiment here. gregor immediately got that aya and yuri were close, potentially even taking note of their traded belts, and went out of his way to get something nice for yuri despite hardly knowing her.
i feel like a lot of people have forgotten as much, especially since it's been so long since c1, but gregor actually spent a good bit of season 1 doing the exact same thing with the other sinners! gregor reads a connection between him and ishmael pretty quickly despite getting off to a rocky start
mostly because gregor can tell that ishmael is pretty sardonic in a very similar way to him. there's been multiple instances where ishmael and gregor have essentially expressed the same sentiment at different moments, most notably gregor's little argument after ishmael got shot with a decay ampule in c4
and ishmael's response to pilot talking about self-sacrifice in c5
i could go ahead and pull up more examples, but in general pm has gone out of their way to show us that gregor and ishmael are pretty similar, so it makes sense for gregor to assume that they're friends, right?
this will be pushpin 1. keep note of this for Later.
ishmael's only the first sinner we see gregor trying to do this with in s1, we also see him try it out with heathcliff, sinclair, and ryoushuu
he's tried to get along with charon, being one of very few sinners that we've seen actually try to establish a connection with her at all
even rodya, despite my insistence that gregor doesn't like her nearly as much as the fandom thinks he does
all of these seem pretty fine and dandy, right? sure it frequently leans towards self-degradation, micromanaging, and commiseration, but gregor can at least be pretty chummy with most of the sinners, can't he?
Pt2. hell's chicken was more than just comic relief guys please
i'm fully aware that this is quite the hot take, but i think hell's chicken deserves a lot more credit for character writing than the fandom gives it. hell's chicken gave us foreshadowing for several events, such as the donqui bloodfiend reveal
heathcliff's distortion in c6 (as well as hong lu's highly speculated distortion at some point in the future)
and ryoushuu and sinclair's continued connection by making him the odd one out on her team
which, hey! that implies something about gregor's odd one out, don quixote, too, doesn't it? yes. yes it does. that's pushpin 2. keep note of that for later.
speaking of pushpins, hey! that's pushpin 1!
splitting into teams is one of the major events in hell's chicken, and most of the sinner's choices are either motivated by very little, backhanded, or motivated primarily by not wanting to be on the opposite leader's side. i didn't include all of the picks, just because i feel like including most of them already gets this across, but i think gregor took one major thing from this: most of the sinners, when push comes to shove, will only side with gregor when they refuse to or can't take his opponent's side.
now, don't get me wrong, i'm fully aware that this is primarily intended to be comedic relief, but when gregor is being described as having his trust broken by ishmael or nearly crying because no one on his team properly sided with him for him, i feel like it's pretty fair to read into this.
something that i think is pretty important to remember in conjunction with this is that we know that gregor is the type to hold a grudge, both from his general attitude towards the G corp soldiers in c1 as well as his continued distaste for vergilius
even beyond the splitting into teams of hell's chicken, the sinners have given gregor plenty of reasons to feel bitter. i feel like this is something people have noticed but haven't really put a finger on, but it's kind of wild just how often the rest of the sinners make gregor the butt of the joke
and sure, we could argue that a fair few of these aren't really made with any ill intent. quite a bit of it could have been meant as harmless teasing, but with gregor being more sensitive than most, it coming from nearly all sides, and as often as it does? yeah, i think he's prone to taking it a bit personally.
Pt3. yes i do still think gregor was the third most important character in canto VII you guys gotta hear me out okay
of course, all of this leads up to the bit of the story i highlighted, doesn't it? c7? i totally get why people haven't really picked up on all the gregor things i did in it, seeing as they were mostly not *directly* said about him or by him.
personally, i think that gregor's distaste for talking about himself on any serious level and thus leading to him getting sort of "sidelined" narratively (which i take issue with that claim, but still. it's effective for getting what i mean across atm) is supposed to lead players to take a deeper look at the times gregor gets held up to other characters and compare and contrast what's being said about them by the matchup. as i showed earlier with his immediate latching onto ishmael, i think this is something gregor himself is at least partially aware of too.
so, that begs the question, who was gregor compared to in canto VII that makes me think it's one of the most critical pieces in understanding his character?
really, i'd like to avoid getting too lost in the analysis of this canto specifically, since i'd like to do a proper post about this later, but i figure i can bury the lede a little before doing it properly.
c7 features several characters being made to perform in sansón's play, acting out the relevant backstory for this segment of the plot. a lot of these characters have rather direct, degrading reasons for playing the roles they do.
outis, a character with an inflated ego who wants her journey to have a purpose, is made to play an aimlessly wandering villager with a single line.
hong lu and ryoushuu, two characters for whom families and the expectations placed upon them are likely going to play a major role, are made to play bloodfiends.
rodya, a character who resents her lot in life and is constantly shown to be eager to leave her destitution behind her and become someone special, is made to play a helpless villager that's too poor to even offer any money to the hero that saves her.
heathcliff, a character that has spent most of his life getting dehumanized by comparing him to beastly animals, is made to play a literal bear whose sole purpose in the plot is to get beat up and then quickly left by the wayside.
sinclair, a character that has two opposed parties essentially treating him as a macguffin to procure for their side, is made to play the character who was arguably the catalyst for this entire canto, not to mention playing a decently major role in ruina.
our star don quixote is made to play her father, the first kindred, but there's someone by their side the entire time, isn't there? don quixote's dear, steadfastly loyal companion. a character which don quixote has tasked themself with getting to come out of their shell?
hello again, pushpin 2.
gregor has been made to play our unreachable star, sancho. someone had to, of course. you can't really tell a story without it's main character, now can you?
now, i should once again give a disclaimer. i am not trying to say that i think adapting what happens to donqui/sancho in c7 to gregor is the road pm is going to take here, not only would that toe a bit past the line of foreshadowing, but it'd also just amount to rehashing that plotline again, which i don't think would make for a particularly exciting story.
what i DO think is that we can take a lot of the things that are said to either directly be the case for sancho and use them to inform how we see gregor.
and god, does playing sancho have some fucking implications for our favorite ossan archetype.
starting off, the earliest moment we get to see of sancho is quite literally her just waiting for death to take her in a pile of ashes.
which, i should remind everyone, is actually pretty damn close to what happens to gregor's literary counterpart at the end of the metamorphosis. gregor samsa experiences one final breaking point that pushes him over the edge and makes him decide to just wait for starvation to take him.
gregor and sancho both consider themselves to no longer be human, something which sancho goes out of her way to highlight repeatedly throughout the canto and gregor is quick to get defensive on her behalf for when outis starts really tearing into her
sancho spends quite a lot of this story denying herself the joys of community and friendship, despite knowing that, even with the rest of the sinners frequently making jokes at her expense and outright insulting her, they were things that she desperately craved.
and, while this is getting into my "outis is a red herring meant to distract us from gregor's eventual betrayal" theorizing, i also think it's worth noting for this discussion that sancho's fellow kindreds, her family, all seem to be under the impression that she dislikes them and ultimately her departure was an act of betrayal
and that, despite gregor being one of LCB's resident mood makers and attempted conflict de-escalators, one of the sinners that's most prone to making appeals to the bonds they've all forged together, only him and faust remained silent during everyone's speech
so yeah, i think there's quite a lot of little details and hints building up to the reveal that gregor's not quite as fond of everyone as he presents himself to be. i do think a lot of this ultimately comes down to gregor getting in the way of his own happiness, similarly to donqui, particularly because he's been frequently portrayed as something of a self fulfilling prophecy, especially by giving him as many christ allegories as they have by way of priest and garden of thorns. gregor is convinced that the rest of the sinners don't like him because he's not convinced anyone could like him, so he convinces himself that he hates them because why should he care if someone that he hates hates him too?
a lot of this ultimately ties back to my personal interpretation of what happens in the metamorphosis as well as my own theories regarding all the times gregor has made weird callbacks and references to lobcorp and ruina, but yeah. i think about this guy and his deeper characterization a fairly normal amount, i think.
to end this off i'll highlight one of my favorite little "gregor is fucking seething and trying so hard to keep it cool" moments, in the credits CG for c7 we see rodya teasing him by drawing a little horse on his window and actively pointing and laughing at it, which gregor really doesn't seem all too pleased about.
i personally think this ties into the other cruel part of sansón forcing gregor to play rocinante, which is the more literal "he's actually just straight up playing rocinante" side of things. gregor was quite literally made to play something less than human, less than even animal really, as he was reduced to nothing more than the shoes don quixote wore as she got to play the leading role. sansón directly makes jokes about gregor being nothing more than shoes in the play twice, which adds to this reading, i think.
this, imo, really plays into the adaptation of the metamorphosis! i've seen a lot of readings for the book that posit that, despite being the protagonist, gregor samsa can't really be considered the main character due to nearly everything he experiences in it being used to further his family's character development at his expense, which i think fits nicely with limbus gregor seemingly having the most said about him through indirect means by holding him up to other characters. also it's rodya carelessly making fun of His Big Major Insecurities™ again like she did in c1 which i always find fun. rodya i love you but god you're the worst.
#beargregor's property#limbus company#project moon#lcb gregor#something to bear in mind#beargregor's analysis#beargregor's theories#do i bother tagging both of those i feel like i do#oh also.#long post#sorry guys i promised i would try and stay brief when i set out to respond to this ask and before i knew it seven hours passed#my bad#does this give me normal gregor fan cred#i'm fully preparing myself to be screenshotted and posted to twitter or reddit with people making fun of my reading of him but idrc honestl#also i'm really hoping that LCB regular check up has donqui actually like#confront gregor about the fact that he was playing her in sansón's plays#i've seen people insinuate that any deeper reading to the roles they got in them is doing too much#and while i really don't agree with that just due to how much sansón fit the roles to be as cruel as possible to their sinners#i do think at the very bare minimum that the comparisons drawn between gregor and sancho are Very Intentional#despite gregor's supposed lack of proper Deep character moments people love to claim i really do think that we know a lot about him#significantly more than people think we do#just because so much of it has been told to us indirectly or has this aspect of plausible deniability to it#just due to gregor being the way he is#a lot of these smaller subtler details in his proper main writing get highlighted more in his IDs and EGO#like gregor's pettiness and grudge holding in AEDD or the aforementioned self-fulfilling prophecy-ness of priest and garden of thorns#anyway. that's it. gregor is fat by the way did i mention that. also very hairy. refer to my url for more details.#ignore how i just can't shut up about him i promise i'm normal. i promise it's over i can rant about him more another day. i swear.
296 notes
·
View notes
Note
this might be an unpopular opinion but actually i think that in homecoming mcu peter was very well characterized? i thought he brought the sass and was very headstrong and i think that's why that film is my favorite out of his, he was throwing himself into situations without deliberation with just a very restless and agitated feel to him at points, and actively driving the plot forward in a way that to me felt very baby peter. i think that fanon (like irondad, woobifying him in fics etc) has contributed to a perception of him that isn't super strong in actual canon. i also think the writers would benefit from reading your tags on that post lol, cause mcu spidey is at his best when HIS choices are actively driving the plot, and at its weakest when hes reacting to things happening to him like in far from home. there's potential for spidey 4, there's a lot of room for angry, broken, but hopeful peter, and i'm sure the mcu will disappoint me but i am a fool and live in hope :')
i guess you have some kind of a point there, and i can see the point you're making - but – i think where it doesn't work is that we never actually get an inkling as to why peter's restless and agitated. why he cares so much about being a hero. why he wants to. when like, in civil war he actually kind of didn't want to get involved with the avengers. he was blackmailed into it. so why that 180?
no consistency in the mcu. no consistency at all. i hear that writers don't even consult each other between movies, and i believe it ,, considering how much whiplash i consistently get from mcu character motivations. (constantly thinking of civil war where hawkeye tells scott "you might go to jail for this", and scott says "yeah well what else is new" nonchalantly, like he didn't just fucking have an entire movie where is whole motivation was "i do not want to go to jail because i want to be with my daughter." what the fuck?? what the fuck mcu??? what the fuck?????????? the mcu does this with literally every character too. tony destroying all his armor in one movie and the next one making ARMOR FOR THE WORLD??????????????? 180s just across the board. we're gonna do a thing and then 3 seconds later we're gonna do the exact opposite thing. i hate the mcu.)
in the comics we entirely understand why peter is agitated and restless. we've seen it. we see his justification literally on the front page of his first appearance in amazing fantasy #15.
the world mocked timid teenager peter parker. so peter wants the world to see the awesome might of spider-man. there you go. that's why he put on the stupid tights. we get it. two sentences and we get the whole schtick.
we pointedly do NOT get to see what kind of kid mcu peter parker was before the spider-bite. we never get to know. we do not know what changed. he doesn't even talk about it. not even freaking once. he never laments that he used to be weak. he never expresses the sentiment that his life has improved now that he has powers, or even what having powers really means to him. just a "i've got powers now. guess i have to become a hero. i guess." there's no motivation for him at ALL. power doesn't mean a thing to him. he's just some kid who has powers i guess and who else is kind of super? uh? tony stark?? yeah okay i wanna be tony stark i guess.
IT ALL MEAAAANS nothing!! ! ! ! ! ! nothing fucking at all!!!!!! it's actually SO SO missing the point of spider-man entirely to not pay any mention at all to who peter parker was before the spider-bite. that lives in him every day. it's an ANXIETY that lives in him every day of his life. it's something really important for you to know about peter. in every issue spider-man is IN, this anxiety manifests in some kind of way, in everything he does.
we never see what's changed for him, how it affects his dynamic with his friends, with aunt may, with anyone. it's barely a source of tension for him because actually, his secret identity is thrown around like it's a joke. it baffles my mind how much the mcu misses the mark with spider-man, actually. whenever i think about mcu spider-man i discover some new way they misunderstood spider-man. i didn't even think about how much is missing from just the omission of pre-spider-bite peter parker. it's such a vital part of spider-man's motivation that's been wiped. his motivation in the mcu is so, so vague. his motivation is the same as any kid who has seen an iron man movie. "hey that guy can fly. i want to fly too. and i want to buy iron man action figures and i want a cool suit too." uhh?? yeah?? what kid doesn't?? lame. lame and weak. mcu peter parker doesn't have a unique personality trait to differentiate him from any 10 year old who's watching these movies. weak and lame.
#sci speaks#sorry i wanted to be more on your team anon because your ask is sweet and optimistic and i wanna be sweet and optimistic too#but every time my brain gears start churning over the mcu i find new ways to hate it#sci talks movies
56 notes
·
View notes