#it's okay if your character isn't always deliberately written

[licorice-and-rum]

My response to some "critics" about Babel

Okay, I'm gonna start by saying this: English is not my first language so I may commit some spelling and grammar mistakes here but I felt like I just had to write this down, especially because of the negative reviews this book has that just… didn't get it.

Don't get me wrong, of course you're allowed to not like this book, I recognize that it's most certainly not gonna be everyone's cup of tea but some of the people here just didn't get what this book was all about. Babel isn't a fantasy like ACOTAR, or HP, or whatever (in the sense that, for those, the story guides the message while Babel is the contrary): like many classical books, Babel was written to make a point, it's a romance, sure, but it was written to argue for something - the necessity of violence.

So, first of all: Babel is a historical fantasy, it talks about colonialism, racism, sexism, and other matters with no qualms, no embellishing to make it digestible, no allegories or metaphors because this isn't the point. Kuang's "lack of nuance" as someone here pointed out is very deliberate and extremely important for the story because the points she wants to make are always lost in nuance (just think how many people go on misinterpreting Star Wars, Hunger Games, or even anti-system songs like The Wall ffs), and the message is too important to get lost in allegories.

Second, as to the story, many people seem to think what she's pointing out is obvious "ur dur colonialism is bad, we get it". No, you clearly don't. There's a profound difference between getting it and actually comprehending it to an elemental level. Robin's travel to Canton illustrates that perfectly: he knew that colonialism was bad, he knew it was violent but he didn't comprehend it until he was forced to face it happening in front of him - to people who could've been easily him. More than that, because that was when he finally connected the theory with the reality, it became palpable to him.

It's not enough to get it, you have to actually stay attuned to it, to feel the flow of its violence throughout the world because then, and only then, I'll realize you can't be complacent, you can't turn your head from it. And Babel is an attempt, however tiny, of showing this to you. Of telling you "Look, you're ignoring it, the discomfort you felt reading this is your conscience telling you you relate to that". So no, I refuse to accept that Kuang should have been more nuanced: she was as clear as she could because she knows people say they get it but they don't, not really.

Third, the magical system is just chef's kiss. I've seen many people complaining about it but the thing is: the silver working is not about having magic in the world, it's about creating a palpable, material place where Kuang could center her attention as she talked about the economic aspect of colonialism. That's because colonial power is not centered in one place or thing, it is scattered all around but you can't hardly make a point like Babel's if you have your characters fighting off colonialism in all corners of the world. Like the Capital in the Hunger Games, Babel is a material place that symbolizes something.

Moreover, the silver working symbolizes the Industrial Revolution and its need for the advance of colonialism. More than that, silver-working is about capital, it's about technology to generate more profit, quicker, for a specific class that doesn't care who they have to kill to continue, doesn't care whether it is good or bad for the common folk.

Fourth, many people pointed out how academic Kuang's writing style felt during Babel and they're right, it is indeed very identifiable. I'm sure I even commented something along the lines of "it feels like I'm having the best History lesson of all time". But I'm going to challenge people who say things against the notion that the historical description of Kuang was unnecessary: every time Kuang chose to give the readers historical context has served somehow to the narrative.

I remember early on in the book when Robin was still a teen walking through London and reading anything he could put his hands on, and then we get two paragraphs of historical and political context for the time, then Robin comments that he didn't understand why this mattered so much. That paragraph served so much, both because it made us know a little more about Robin and because it served to make us understand the profound environmental change England was going through at the time.

And every time she did this, it served for something. Again, Babel is a historical fantasy, it is supposed to make you think about the point Kuang is trying to make but you won't understand it if you don't know the context of which Robin and the other characters in the book are coming from. It was a time of decision: either England would consolidate itself as an almost all-powerful oppressor, or it could go down… if the oppressed people - who share a common enemy - understood their responsibility to do something.

The strikes of the English working class, the violent acts of rioters, the advancement in technology, the possibility of the Opium War, the colonialism… it's all important. It's important because it allows us to understand the deep connection between it all. It allows us to understand who profits off of it, and who doesn't; who is able to understand and who isn't. It's why Letty is upper-class. It's why Abel isn't.

It's not as simple as some people think to understand colonialism, the flows through which one thing is tied to another. Why do people ask "How does this affect me?" when we point out deeply unfair things like unpaid maternity leave (I actually saw an American once saying she "wouldn't want her tax money to go to someone who didn't plan through"), like the fact people starve when we have the ability to feed a world and a half, of that Palestine is going through ethnic cleansing? Because they are unable to understand how closely their lives are tied to other peoples they have never met and probably never will.

Kuang's message is not "colonialism is bad", she's saying "These are all the forms through which colonialism is bad to everyone but a few, do something about it", she's saying "Every single one of your struggles is tied together in more ways than you even understand. A person in Haiti, in China, in India, in the other side of the world, has more to do with you than these white rich people, fight with them, stand with them."

Fifth, I can't believe I gotta say this but I'm not going to even bother with you if you think this book is somehow "anti-white": just get over your main character syndrome. We're talking about a historical fantasy set in England in the epitome of colonialism through the eyes of a person of color. Of course, most white people are gonna be bad, get over yourself ffs!

The actual entitlement to the protagonism white people have is maddening. As a white woman (in Brazil, at least), I'm ashamed of some comments here. It's not because white people in this book are majorly racist (which, according to the setting is 100% accurate) that Kuang is talking about you (although, if you're so bothered by it, it's probably about you anyway). This is a book about the experience of people of color under the oppression of colonialism: white people are the problem!

You can't just expect someone to write about colonialism and not talk majorly about race. White people reap all the privileges of this system and not just that, they are responsible for it, and all the crying about being the bad guys is just insufferable (they're actually so right about having to console Letty once she learns about the racism they suffer).

Be f*ing accountable for your privileges, take responsibility for your internalized racism, and be accountable for the system that privileges you. It doesn't matter that it wasn't your fault, that you didn't set up the system, you still benefit from it anyway so get a grip. This story isn't about you at all, it isn't about how some white people fought against slavery or oppression, it isn't about you.

Let's be very clear about this: most white people who fought against slavery did so to serve their own interests, exactly as Kuang points out. This doesn't mean none of them were good people who actually believed slavery was bad but we're talking of a time when racism and racial discrimination weren't even discussed seriously. Most white people, even the ones against slavery would have a deeply ingrained racism in them, so get real.

More than that, though: if those people who actually have no shame in saying Babel is "anti-white" had actually read the book through, they would know that some white people actually help and are good people in the story.

Anyway, Babel is so good, it's so painfully real and so passionately well-written. You can feel Kuang's love for her people, the struggles of what it means to love something but still not be a part of it, the deep understanding of how the world works, and how intricately every single thing in our lives is.

I just felt so heard (as a person from a third-world country) reading Babel, like someone was telling me all this rage and indignation I feel is justified, it's valid. I just treasured it so much, how I identified with Robin's need for security contrasting with his indignation for the price of it; with the rage Griffin carried around him, sharpened and well-directed even in its volition; with the love Victoire had to learn to have for her country and its story; with all the pain I was able to share with someone who understood it.

It's an honor to allow words to change me so fundamentally. It's humbling to realize I'm not alone, that my actions and my feelings are shared by other people. It is really precious, you know, to be able to become a better person than I was before because of a book.

[psychagoguedigitalmusical]

Epic: The Musical - Lyric Textual Analysis 1 - The Infant and the Horse

(Skip to the end if you want to just see my analysis of The Infant and the Horse.)

I hope you like Epic: The Musical (if so, you're in good company here), because we're gonna be talking about it here. We're gonna be talking about it in depth, and we're gonna be talking about it a lot. And we're gonna be talking about it for quite a while.

As I mentioned in yesterday's blogpost, one of primary approaches in the development of Psychagogue: A Digital Musical is through a close and thorough analysis of Epic. Eventually, I plan to analyze other seminal works of musical theatre and miscellaneous other specific relevant works. In a sense, I know I like the body of Epic, but in order to create something, I need to understand its bones, its sinews, its nerves and muscles. By surgically extracting key information, I can study the specimen to build up a foundation to understand why I like it and use that framework to reverse-engineer them to create something of my own.

Like any good house, I am building on a solid foundation of bones. In this case, the bones are the basic storytelling elements of the narrative. Specifically, the text itself. And if you haven't done a lot of literary analysis before, that's okay, but I will say now that whenever I use the word "text" in this blog, I am being deliberate with its meaning. I mean "text" in this case to mean the explicitly written words that compose the work. If that seems obvious, then consider what text isn't. Text is not subtext. Text is not an implication (even a really strong one). Text is incontrovertible, an undeniable fact of the narrative. You can have implications and interpretations that are supported by the text, but I am making that distinction here early on. If we use the show-tell dichotomy, text is the explicit tell. Subtext is the implicit show.

With that out of the way, let's take a look at this S✨P✨R✨E✨A✨D✨S✨H✨E✨E✨T

I might change the format for later entries, but for now, the spreadsheet is divided into 5 main sections:

Song info - Basic information about the song including its title, a link to listen to it, and a link to the full lyrics.

Core elements - I have a running theory that every narrative-driven song (that should be like all of them in a Musical Theatre context I think?) has a core conflict, a resolution of some sort, and the central philosophy, tension, or question can be identified within a single quote. This often, but not always, is the title of the song itself.

The Narrative situation - In what ways does this song actually move the plot forward. Like, what literally happens in this song? Unfortunately, 40 songs in a row about some people in a blank white room singing about their feelings wouldn't make for much of a story. In the context of a musical, I will be working under the idea that they are purely told in song, without any non-song connective tissue. If you go see buy some tickets to your local theatre's staged production of Legally Blonde: The Musical or something similar, you'll likely see a hybrid approach, but I'm going to take Epic's approach on this one and keep everything song-only. (That's right, that means no ARG either. Probably.)

Factual Character information - What do we learn about these characters? Factually, demographically? What contextual information do we actually have about this person singing about his feelings? Odysseus is a soldier from Ithaca. Zeus is a god from Ithaca. Morvic is an adolescent from a small coastal town.

Character relationships/philosophies/perspectives - Similar to factual information, but more about how each character interacts with the world around them. What do they believe in? How do they feel about the situations and characters around them?

With the preamble out of the way, here's the actual results I came up with. Note that this phase of analysis focuses purely on the lyrics of the songs in Epic: The Musical. (This also means that yes, at this phase, the information here will be obvious. You might look at these results and think "duh". That's intentional. This analysis is important as part of the overarching effort of understanding the writing techniques Jorge Rivera-Herrans is using to make information obvious.) For now I am not touching on any musical motifs (yes, Penelope's leitmotif can be heard in the pause between lyrics, yes Odysseus is definitely thinking of her in that moment, no that is not directly stated or implied by the text of the lyrics. Implied by the text of the music itself maybe, but that's a conversation for another day.)

Without further ado:

Epic: The Musical - Lyric Textual Analysis 1 - The Infant and the Horse

Central Conflict:

Odysseus is faced with a difficult choice. He either has to kill a defenseless baby or allow his home and family to be completely destroyed once the baby grows up. He loves his family dearly but is distraught at the idea of committing such an act.

Resolution:

Odysseus must make this difficult decision right now.

Thesis Quote (Fundamental question or philosophy):

"It's just an infant, it's just a boy"

What factual information do we explicitly learn about the situation?

Odysseus and his men have been at war against the Trojans for 10 years

Right now, Odysseus and his crew are beginning to execute a decisive counterattack.

Odysseus and his crew are planning to enter and take the city.

Odysseus' attack becomes interrupted by some unknown force

Odysseus gets a vision of the future from the gods. This future is certain, but can be changed if Odysseus takes action right now.

Odysseus must kill Prince Hector's son in order to avoid the future that the vision shows.

Prince Hector's son is a baby

If Odysseus does not kill Prince Hector's son right now, the boy will grow up and enact vengeance upon Odysseus. Specific consequences include, but are not limited to destroying his home and killing Penelope.

If Odysseus attempts to circumvent this fate another way, he will fail. The gods themselves will ensure that if the boy lives, that this fate will come to pass.

What factual information do we implicitly learn about the situation?

Troy has had a slight upper hand in the war up to now.

The crew's attack on Troy is successful.

What factual information do we explicitly learn about a character?

Odysseus is a soldier in a war who has been fighting against Troy for at least 10 years.

Odysseus is a noble of some sort.

Odysseus has never been in a situation where he has had to consider killing a defenseless baby.

Many of the men in the crew have families at home.

What factual information do we implicitly learn about a character?

Odysseus is the commander of a group of soldiers.

Penelope and Telemachus are Odysseus' family members.

Zeus is a god, but not the only god. He has powers including knowing information about people's lives and the ability to give people visions of the future. The gods interfere in people's lives.

What information do we explicitly learn about a character's relationships, perspectives, or philosophies?

Odysseus considers the soldiers under his command his brothers.

Odysseus is motivated by his connection to Penelope and Telemachus.

Zeus doubts Odysseus' ability to make the difficult decision in choosing who must die.

What information do we implicitly learn about a character's relationships, perspectives, or philosophies?

Odysseus is an effective commander who has the trust of his men.

Odysseus has and values inner strength.

Odysseus has and values pride.

Odysseus values the ability to fight through pain.

Odysseus understands that it is important to have a motivation in order to keep yourself going.

Odysseus is highly confident of his own ability as a fighter.

Odysseus does not want to kill a defenseless baby. He wants to follow his sense of morality and does not have an inherent bloodlust. He would rather take on some amount of sacrifice than go against his morality in this way.

Odysseus is skilled at finding alternative solutions that do not involve killing.

Zeus is stubborn.

One thing I noticed was that the highest density categories for this piece were Explicit Narrative info and Implicit Character Perspective info. Makes I suppose for the first song, especially when the audience can reasonably be expected to come into the experience with some pre-existing knowledge. For establishing Odysseus, it was interesting to see what information was stated outright vs implied. I'll be curious to see how this proportion shifts from song to song.

If you're interested in ever viewing my analysis in depth, including the concrete lyrics backing each of these bullet points, as well as additional notes, I'll be keeping this spreadsheet link publicly available in View-only mode. Over time I will be adding more tabs for each song. My next post will be either another one of these analyses for "Just a Man", some Psychagogue world-building info I've been putting together over time that is almost ready to compile, or some musical ideas I was able to scrounge together.

Until then, that's all I've got for now.

[alinaastarkov]

I kind of fell down the jonrya rabbit hole and would like to hear more opinions. I'm not convinced that George gave up on JonArya. No one has proof of this or can pinpoint exactly where he was abandoned. No character has replaced Arya's importance to Jon and vice versa, and I don't think that will ever happen. Their relationship is the strongest in asoaif and is treated as a driving force and something separate from the rest, and I ask myself why. What is the reason for so much emphasis? ADWD is the book with the most clues, since Jon spends a lot of time agonizing over her. He dies for her in the end, and she is his last thought. Not to mention that famous line about the heart, which is very romantic coded. The foreshadowing didn't vanish with the first books, and I truly wonder w h y. Does anyone have any interesting theories about them or speculation?

When I re-read an AMA from George, I was quite surprised by this response.

Has there been a character that you have given a reprieve to, or maybe deviated from the path you originally were going to send them on? If so, whom?

No, not really.

In some cases the chronologies have diverged from what I originally intended, but the overall character arcs remain the same.

This was years after the 1993 outline. And in 2016, he stated that he would continue with the endings he had in mind since 1991.

Also, this is from SSM:

Question: How different is the plot from what he originally envisioned?

GRRM: Not different - just more of it. It has grown in complexity but he likes it that way because it feels real to him. - SSM 2010

Some more quotes.

"But the size is different, and I've introduced some other elements to the books, but it's still the same characters, the '91 characters."

"Some major characters — yes, I always had plans, what Tyrion's arc was gonna be through this, what Arya's arc was gonna be through this, what Jon Snow's arc is gonna be. "

"Who is the most major character you've changed you mind about your plans for?

I don't want to reveal what I've planned for some of these characters, but I'm pretty well on track with most of the major characters. It's minor characters like Bronn that assume greater importance."

After a re-reading, I started to wonder… Why did they give up on being together if they did everything to be by each other's side? They are their true selves with each other, so why shouldn't they be together? Or share their lives together? I've seen some people claim that their relationship will never be the same. And yes, that's true. But isn't that applicable to any relationship in asoiaf? They are deliberately written as something too deep and an intense transcendental bond that no one else has; if they have no chance of thriving, no one does. And as much as George is accused of doing things for shock value, he cares about consistency. He definitely doesn't treat this relationship as trivial to be shattered. Jon is Arya's first priority. He is her home. They love each other unconditionally, and there’s no one Jon loves as much as he does Arya, no doubt on that. My impression is that George may have created an infrastructure for them to end up together somehow. Not necessarily in the way he initially envisioned it, but as soulmates who find refuge in each other and are saved by their unique bond that inspires them to live. Resurrected Jon will probably take the FitzChivalry Farseer route. I doubt he'll come back super damaged because he needs to be reasonably okay for some plot lines. And George always intended for all 5 main characters to survive so.

I would be more inclined to think that everything was scrapped if Jon's arc in ADWD was vastly different. George not only deepened their connection and recycled an old plot line, but also introduced powerful new themes. They are each other's hearts and homes. This approach is very rare in this universe. And no other relationship is treated with this same importance. Why should we pay so much attention to them? What is George's point in this? Like, a lot of time passed between 1993 and 2011. He had more than enough time to rewrite Jon's arc and remove Arya's influence. But he continues to keep these characters intensely and emotionally connected throughout all the books. If he accidentally wrote them as soulmates, wouldn't it be easier to remove it after the first book? I have some vague ideas of what he's going to do with them. But I genuinely don't think it's out of the question as so many fans confidently claim

sorry for taking so long to answer this anon! it was mostly because i agree with everything you said and couldn't think of what to add. i agree there seems to be consensus that george initially planned for them but changed his mind, probably after the first/second book. however, as you say, it then makes no sense that jon's adwd arc is the way it is. for me, it's the most explicitly romantic we get, with many of jon's thoughts (i want my bride back, imagining arya in ramsay's bed, winter's lady etc.) being things a brother cannot innocently think about his sister (despite what some people say and i worry about their relationship with their sibling tbh). if it was scrapped, i wonder how they explain adwd? (they mostly don't, explain it away as platonic, or pretend these thoughts are just about his 'family'). there's also the fact that george's affc outline (before affc and adwd were split) had jon going to and probably dying in hardhome, removing his rescue of arya and betrayal because of that entirely. george explicitly altered his adwd plot to include more arya. i frankly would be amazed at the ga's lack of awareness of the books they claim to love if j*nsas didn't exist

[suzukiblu]

For your ask game, what’s your favorite thing you’ve ever written?

. . . god I don't even know, man, that's a LOT of things, hahaha. And like, that answer definitely changes depending on the day/year/phase of the moon. So you're getting a couple answers here! Also I'm gonna keep this mostly to DC and only include finished fics, because me picking between WIPs would take a thousand years and also probably kill us all, lol (ignore the fact that a couple of these fics have sequels in-progress right now, STILL COUNTS OKAY??).

everything happens for a reason. sometimes that reason is that you are stupid and make bad decisions. is one of the funniest fucking things I've ever written, full stop. Lex is SO fun to write, seriously, I could write him all fucking DAY.

I'm really proud of blondes really do have more fun, both because of how much it seems to have affected/touched people who read it and because I think it was my first experience with writing gender euphoria as a major thing and writing, like, an actual explicit trans narrative? Like, I definitely wrote genderfuckery and implications and metaphors before that and probably even some trans characters, arguably, but that's the first story I really remember deliberately just making about being TRANS. And also holy shit, man, did I ever love writing gender euphoria for the first time, especially because I'd mostly only seen gender DYSphoria as a focal point in other stories and it just didn't/doesn't resonate with me the same way. I'm not trans because everything else makes me miserable, I'm trans because that's what makes me HAPPY. I don't remember if I was intentionally thinking that at the time, but that's the story I wanted to write for that one.

one day this will all be yours and you found me when no one else was looking are both concepts I love and found really cathartic to write and was very pleased to finish. I love that they're sort of "families of choice" fics about, like, actual BIOLOGICAL families (like, in the context of the fics, anyway), which probably sounds weird but is a concept I'm sort of painfully fascinated by--like, about the fact that you CAN choose your family, obviously, but sometimes you're lucky enough to find out that you had someone worth choosing already and just didn't necessarily know it, or to both grow into people who CAN choose each other even if you had problems or lashed out due to outside traumas or didn't always understand each other. That's, like, very personally relevant and meaningful to me, the idea that maybe the thing that got all fucked-up and the choices you made when you didn't fully understand the consequences of them can still be worked through and repaired and made into something new and better.

Also, special mention because this one is back a few fandoms but zero humble on it: best friends means you get what you deserve is just really, really good, and I did GOOD on it, hah. I took a three-word prompt/concept and turned it into 17k of "hey, doesn't this make more sense for why this character is the way he is, and isn't this what the main character actually wanted??" in genre-savvy explanation of why the sidekick character might stick around for the antisocial asshole hero and seem perfectly happy to base their life largely around them no matter how said hero treats them, and then I made the Consequences(tm) happen to Jaskier and Geralt, both bad AND good. I am just SO dang proud of that one, UGH I love it. ❤️❤️❤️❤️ FRIENDSHIP, AND THE CONSEQUENCES THEREOF.

[guess-that-ship]

Potential Reasons Why Submissions Are Rejected

Do you wonder why your ship was rejected? Well, here's some potential reasons why:

(all examples provided are written by me and are not intended to be a ship from any existing media)

1. The summary described the story, not the relationship

This is perhaps the most common reason why I reject a ship. This is ultimately subjective, but I should be able to get a clear picture of their relationship just from one summary. Just describing the story does not do that.

Example: "A is the newly-appointed ruler of his kingdom, and B is his childhood friend. After a prophesied calamity threatens to wipe out humanity, they go on a journey fighting monsters, meeting new people, and grow to become better people overall. They fall in love, and the story ends with them kissing."

Cool story, but what about their relationship? This doesn't tell me anything about it.

2. The summary was too specific

I feel like some submissions just give too many details that can give a ship away immediately. This doesn't stop every ship from being recognized immediately--I can't know every single piece of media--but I think it helps stops the majority.

Example: "These two characters are aliens who are also pirates. They are rivals, but in one battle on the moon, A severely injures B, resulting in her falling into a coma. A feels bad, and everyone agrees she went too far. A ends up going on a journey to revive B, and it ends with A confessing her feelings to B. B reciprocates, and they decide to end their rivalry and be together forever."

The mere mention of alien pirates would narrow it down a lot. The battle on the moon narrows it down even further. This probably would be acceptable if you removed some of the more defining details.

3. The summary was too vague/not unique

The opposite of #2, summaries like these just feel like they've been done a million times before. Try your best to make your submission stand out!

Example: "A falls in love with their best friend, B. After much deliberation, they confesses to them, but B does not reciprocate, leaving them heartbroken."

This could describe a multitude of ships. Maybe if you mentioned how they met or what happened after A confessed, this would be an acceptable submission.

Striking a balance between vague and specific can be tricky, so I encourage you to just write it and see what happens.

4. I was unsure if I needed to tag it

This reason isn't too common, but sometimes there's just submissions I feel like need to be tagged, but the submitter did not provide any and I could not think of any tags to be added. Please try to include any tags you may think is necessary!

5. I recognized the ship submitted

This has only happened twice so far in my time running the blog, but I feel like it's still worth mentioning. I'm actually surprised it's only happened twice--some fandoms I'm in are definitely big enough that at least one ship has a reasonable chance to be submitted. But there's millions of ships out there, so maybe it isn't that surprising.

I think in both cases they would've been good if it was modified to remove identifying details. However, both cases would give away the ship when combined with the submission name, and I try to avoid modifying the name.

So, sometimes it just comes down to luck.

Well, I hope this helps, and happy submitting! Remember, it's okay if your ship doesn't get in. You can always try again next time--there's a ton of amazing ships submitted every season, but there's a limited number of spots on the bracket, so I cannot accept them all.

[sfblah]

blah I CHALLENGE you. To rank the noses of some of your OCs...whatever ranking system you choose, whether it's Shapeliest or Narrowest/Longest etc--- I must know your various rankings

Okay I love this lmao. Been trying to think up some good nose superlatives, and I think I have enough for a decent little uh. Whatever this is gonna be lol. I'll do a top 3 for each but even with a limit this is probably still gonna be long af

Longest

What it sounds like lol. Generally meaning longest from bridge to base, but also tip to face. Heh that rhymes.

Mina. I mean, who else could it be? lol. I haven't written too too much with her, but she's probably gonna be my long nose queen OC forever at this point. She's a witch with a pointy nose that sticks out really far, and that's just kinda it. Nothing really inherently magical about it, that's just how she is. She also has really long nostrils to go along with it, though they "only" go about a third of the way down and the rest is all squish.

Komithe. She has a "normal" long nose, but as a half-elf I imagine her having "long" features in general. I've also given a lot of attention to her having long, thin nostrils too. I debated having that be an elven feature in her setting, but ultimately I feel like it doesn't really matter and it's just one of her defining traits. Though in her case her nostrils would probably be considered abnormally narrow by human standards. Which is still hot imo.

Cyd. Robot girl OC who I haven't written about in An Age. Similar to Komithe I just figure she has deliberately elegant features, including a long nose. Hot office lady robot who can sneeze to clean herself out, but her sneeze is programmed to be "polite" more than anything, so she's rather dusty.

Honorable Mention: Tracy. Old old Adventure Club OC, and I think she might have been the first character I ever described as having long, thin nostrils lol. Definitely the first where it became a defining trait. There must always be one.

Widest

Again basically what it sounds like on the tin. Farthest from left to right lol.

Lena. Naturally her schnoz gets even bigger and wider in wereboar form, but even in her human form she's just got a big ol nose. She has a handful of traits that could be interpreted as her wereboar nature influencing her even as a human, i.e. chubby, wide nose, snorty laugh, but I imagine not every wereboar is like that and in some ways that's just her being her lol.

Kyase. Maybe this is cheating since her nose is only really wide sometimes lol. Basically she's an alien who in classic pulp sci-fi fashion is very similar to a human but with two or three little differences. One of which is that at rest her nostrils are effectively closed up compared to a human's, and when they flare they can get extra wide. And her nose isn't even especially narrow when un-flared, it's like average human nose width that can flare out a lot more.

Lane. Shame I never really did more with this character lol. She's a decade old by now jeebus. Probably the widest nose with nothing unusual influencing it, although she's basically an occult detective. Basically she's if resting bitch face was a person except with a wide, upturned nose that she hates and is self-conscious about.

Thiccest

Not necessarily the longest or the widest overall, but like the most filled out, the most shapely. I wish I could think of a more sexy word to describe this than "fleshy," but that really does encapsulate it the best.

Penny. She actually didn't start off this way in my imagination, but after a couple chapters of the isekai series I decided she should have a nice, pudgy nose. I guess pudgy is also a good word. She also has fairly small nostrils, giving her nose an even thiccer appearance.

Skasa. I really, really want to get back to her story sometime soon lol. I described her nose as "stocky" early on, and I think that's just a good look for her. I picture her nose having that sort of "blocky" quality to it, if that makes any sense. Like particularly it has a defined, squared tip and is more corners and flat surfaces than curves.

Bucket. Yeah time to promote the new girl. She just has a big ol chonker. Not the longest or widest nose, but still undeniably big. The kind that just looks squishy. She also probably bumps things with it a lot, even if it's not abnormally huge or anything.

Honorable Mention: Sophie. Kinda the jack of all trades, master of none nose lol. She doesn't hit any extreme, but her nose is long-ish, wide-ish, and filled-out-ish all at the same time.

Debated having a "most nose hair" category but that would just be Sophie in first with every other OC I've ever written tied for second lol.

Okay this was really fun. Can we make ranking OCs in various things a trend? That would be neat. Thanks for the ask!

[trelkez]

Me watching Ted Lasso 3.11:

I truly thought the last few episodes of the show had broken any remaining faith I had in its storytelling, but no. The second scene of this episode: that broke any remaining faith I had in Ted Lasso's storytelling. This season is NOT GOOD. And yet: are they going to make my OT3 canon? Are they?

I'm going to process Ted Lasso 3.11 (mostly) the way I did last week, by doing a rewatch and taking everything in order as it happens. The show's writing is so incoherent at this point that I'm not going to attempt to impose order on it; things just occur. This is the way.

1. Ted's Mom

I spent the entire opening credit sequence mentally reviewing every Ted/Trent fic I've ever read that had some kind of take on Ted's mom – and realizing that whatever we were about to get wasn't going to be as interesting as anything I'd read in fic, because this season is hell-bent on the idea that all conflict can be washed away in the space of a single conversation. 

Remember when I would've just been excited to finally meet Ted's mom? Pepperidge Farm remembers.

2. Jade hates working with her boyfriend

And who can blame her? This woman has one thing, and that is working at Taste of Athens. Come on, Nate, get your own thing!

3. "We want you to come back to Richmond."

So, okay.

I've already written pretty extensively on how badly handled Nate's redemption arc has been. This has been a problem all season long; before I moved back to Tumblr, I was writing small, irate tweets about it.

Let's go back and look at some of the things I said during and after season 2:

2.07: Nate - his characterization has been really consistent: he's always been a jerk to Will, he uses his power over others to belittle them to make himself feel better, he conflates being assertive with being aggressive, this stuff was in s1 too

post-s2, 1/3: the show put a lot of work into showing Nate punching down, his growing narcissism, the ways feeling underappreciated makes him cruel to others and himself; I don't think we're meant to take away that being denied a Nespresso machine justifies a heel turn

post-s2, 2/3: Nate's history with women as shown is not great - when he thinks he's fired he immediately calls Rebecca a shrew; "perhaps you'd like to give me your number, too" to Jade the hostess as soon as he feels like he can order her around; kissing Keeley at all

post-s2, 3/3: when he kissed Keeley I was like, sure, this tracks; (for him) it becoming solely about him being mad that it wasn't enough to get Roy's attention also tracks. but the rest ... and some of the media takeaway ... is weird to me. is this relatable content?? should it be?

What gets me about all of this is that sometimes, this season has almost convinced me that Nate leaking the panic attack story to Trent was just a weak moment for which an otherwise lovable guy should be forgiven – but the evidence isn't there. They were so consistent in how they built up Nate's fall; they seeded that in as far back as season one. They signaled it through hair color! They unfolded it piece by piece, in a deliberate, escalating spiral from which there ultimately was no last-minute escape.

And then we get to season three, and two seasons of careful character building immediately becomes meaningless. Season three's Nate is a different person. This entire season is taking place in an alternate universe. And there's no reason they had to do that, because they had an entire twelve-episode season of increasingly long episodes in which to slowly but surely make Nate a better person! Time for him to learn a series of important lessons that tie into past behavior; time for him to slowly reconcile with his father; time for him to grow without erasing the person he had always been. Time to build him up into a better version of himself.

Instead, this is what we have. And even then, some of the most important parts of the story of Nate's redemption have happened off-screen. Nate quitting off-screen last week was truly shocking; the team discussing Nate's situation, deciding to forgive him, and voting on whether or not to invite him back – that happening off-screen is unforgivable. The West Ham storyline has, thus far, mattered so little to this season that maybe (.......maybe) we can say that severing ties with Rupert wasn't a key part of his journey, even though that's absurd, but Nate's return to Richmond is everything. That's the whole ballgame. 

For Colin to be part of the welcoming committee is truly fucking egregious. Even this very season, Colin is still repeating his affirmation from therapy as he actively works on building up his self-confidence – something Nate deliberately tried to destroy. At no point did I imagine that a one-on-one with Colin wasn't going to be part of Nate's apology tour. But now – one sprig of lavender for Will, and that's all it takes? Nate's treatment of Colin isn't going to be addressed at all? 

This is the same team that collected red cards like candy against West Ham after Roy and Beard showed them the video of Nate ripping up the "believe" sign. Remember the power walk of fury past Nate to open the second half of that game? Why do they now suddenly want him back? Because they heard he was working in a restaurant and felt sorry for him? Because they heard he apologized to Will and decided that was enough? At this point, I genuinely think the writers didn't know how that conversation would go, so they skipped over it. If you aren't sure how to get the team back on Nate's side, just have it happen off-screen; then it doesn't matter how it happened, only that it did. If you only tell and never show, you can make anything happen without having to get from A to B. 

All of this mess, all of this time, and we don't get to be in the room as the team reaches some kind of closure on everything Nate did.

4. "Richmond have won fifteen matches in a row. With two games left, you're just four points off Manchester City for the Premier League title."

Thanks for expositing all of that, Reporter Guy. If it weren't for the occasional infodump, we'd never know what was going on in the team's season! Exposition Characters, you're the true heroes.

5. "That goal is a lie. It should be retracted from the record. I apologize to everyone, especially the kids."

If they had kept to this kind of funny-but-alarming tone without going too overboard on it, Jamie's pre-Manchester depressive episode would've been a lot more effective.

I know this show can handle depression, anxiety, and parent-induced stress in a thoughtful way and balance that with tonally appropriate comedy, but can it do that … anymore?

6. Ted's ever-increasing mom stress

To that end: the way they built up Ted being so put out his mother was in town, I thought for sure we were going to find out he had been dodging her calls about something (was Michelle getting married after all?) and this would reveal whatever it was to the audience. 

I think – I think – that the actual intended effect here is to underscore that Ted ran an entire continent away from his problems and all of his unprocessed trauma, and having all of that catch up to him without warning triggered a stress cascade resulting in the meltdown we'll get at the end. But if that's the intention, what this episode really underscores is that they simply do not know how to handle this sort of storyline anymore. Dottie Lasso is lovely and entertaining and you definitely can look at her and see where Ted comes from, but the Ted parts of this story are about as nuanced as a sledgehammer on concrete.

7. "Trent, your hair is fabulous. It really is. It's just stylin'."

I never thought that Trent would actually meet Ted's mother in the show. I can't wait to see what fic writers do with this. (Please don't get discouraged by however the show ends and walk away, fic writers! We need you now, tonight. We need you more than ever.)

8. Van Damme's mask

This is officially more follow-up on a previous episode's subplot than we have had about almost any other subplot this entire season, and it's about one of the most disposable stories they've told.

9. OT3 Watch: "Shouting is Roy's love language."

Does Trent ship it? One of us, one of us.

10. OT3 Watch: Jamie crying on Roy

There's a lot about this scene I loved, so let's take a break for positivity! That sounds nice, doesn't it?

Jamie bursting into tears and then, when asked what's wrong, saying, "I don't know, I don't know, I don't know": intensely relatable. He's already in tears as he walks into the boot room, just barely holding it in, and the second Roy pushes him to toughen up (in general), he loses it, because of course he does: he's dreading another trauma at the hands of his abusive dad, in the hometown that hates him. It makes perfect sense for Jamie to be having a serious depressive episode, and it is entirely in character for him to describe that as "I don't use any conditioner anymore, because what's the fucking point."

This is one thing this season has done well, with patience and consistency: it's believable for Jamie to break down crying on Roy because they put the time in to get these two to that point. Last season, it was a big fucking deal when Roy hugged Jamie. This season, if Jamie is going to cry on anyone, of course it's going to be Roy.

That said: I think it was a mistake to go quite so hard on playing this for laughs. Depression and trauma absolutely can be mined for comedy. "Do you think a depressed person could make this?" works because it's still Ben Wyatt, it's just Depressed Ben Wyatt. Jamie smushing Roy's face around as Phil Dunster gives it his absolute best comedy wailing sob doesn't … feel like Jamie? It just feels like comedy. If the moment isn't organic to the character, probably it needed a rewrite.

"It probably needed a rewrite," the Ted Lasso season three story. – Then again, I wonder all the time how much of this season's problems are due to the infamous production-halting Jason Sudeikis rewrites, so … maybe not? Maybe this season needed fewer rewrites and more Bill Lawrence? Who can say.

("Will, you missed a good one" is a great closing note for the series-long gag of overheard emotional scenes in the boot room. If they do another one in the finale, they'll have overshot it.)

11. "Hey, Roy, would it bother you if we brought Nate back?" / "No, I don't give a fuck."

At this point, I briefly stopped watching. 

I went back to 2.12 to see if Roy knows that Nate was the source for the panic attack story: as of that episode, as far as I can tell, he doesn't. 

I went to 3.04 to see if there was any indication during the West Ham episode that Roy had figured it out by then, but that episode focuses on the "believe" sign, which everyone but Ted seems to be finding out about for the first time.

Roy doesn't know that Nate actively tried to ruin Ted. (Does it make any sense for Roy to not have done the math when he was in the room when Ted opened up to the coaches about his panic attacks? Probably not, but that appears to be the canon.) He does know what Nate was like, particularly toward the end; he knows that Nate abandoned ship for West Ham; he knows that Nate ripped the sign, and he used that to turn the entire team against Nate for the West Ham game; and perhaps most importantly, Roy is not especially known as an easygoing, forgiving guy.

This is a man who carried a devastating news clipping around in his wallet for his entire career and beyond. A guy who couldn't hug Jamie in celebration until he headbutted him to make them even. This is Roy Kent, who is known even by people who don't watch this show as the one with the anger issues.

And he's just – fine? To bring Nate back? He holds no grudges? Roy Kent? We're really going to have Roy Kent as the voice of "yeah, whatever, I don't care" while Beard is left to fume alone?

12. "If you bring that Judas back, I will burn this place to the fucking ground."

Once again, Beard is the only one who's seen season two. And yet, this is being set up as a conflict that Beard has to set aside. 

Has Nate apologized to Ted at this point? No. Was Nate an increasingly toxic presence in the locker room last season? Yes. Do they have any knowledge of his coaching style at West Ham that we're aware of that would suggest that he's had a major personality change? No. Are they currently on a fifteen-game winning streak without Nate? Yes. Are there only two games left in the season? Yes. 

Is there any reason to bring Nate back at this point? No. And Beard, who has been the only one all season long who has retained any emotional awareness of past events, is only allowed to have that awareness so that it can be used as a justifying force for Nate's return.

I support you, Beard. This is all some bullshit. You should be allowed to be pissed about it. 

13. Nora!

Is Rebecca's aside about Nora telling her to stop using her private jet the closest we're going to get to a Nora appearance this season? There's still time for her to pop up in the finale, but that seems unlikely.

14. OT3 Watch: Keeley checking in on Jamie

I was on the fence about whether or not they were going too hard on humor with Jamie's depression until "a suitcase is a drawer without a home … wahh." This is the best they could do for depression comedy? This is a comedy series that did an entire season about depression!! Phil Dunster really is doing his best in this episode, but not even he could elevate that line.

I do like the general concept of Roy going to Keeley for help with Jamie, only for Keeley to make it all worse. Roy being better at comforting Jamie is conceptually very funny. Writing dialogue that does justice to a story outline is tricky, isn't it? Mm.

15. Sam and Rebecca???

Are they doing this, or are they just going to tease it every single episode? Are Sam and Rebecca endgame? Surely not, right. If it were endgame, wouldn't we have gotten into the meat of it a lot sooner than … the finale?

If you know a Tedbecca shipper, maybe give them a warm cookie this week, because this episode did not move that anywhere promising.

(My money is still on Houseboat Guy popping up out of nowhere.)

16. OT3 Watch: Jamie and Keeley follow Jamie home

If this is the first time Keeley is meeting Jamie's mom, that means – he never took her home when they were dating?

Roy staring in absolute slack-jawed shock at Jamie and his mom cuddling on the couch is me. Roy is me. Setting aside for a moment just how much is going on there, I never would have guessed that Jamie had a relationship like this with a mom who was still in the picture. 

In 1.06, Jamie talks about how his mom got him into football and supported him but probably wouldn't be proud of him lately; in 3.06, we hear about a trip they took to Amsterdam when he was a teenager. Is that … it? Have there been other references to his mom? In 2.08, when Richmond plays Manchester City, there is a lot about his dad but no reference to his mom that I remember. The show is so laser-focused on Jamie's dad that I assumed his mother, whether dead or estranged or somehow unwell, wasn't an active force in his life in the present day.

This is a show about dads. They've told us that in interviews all along. Ted's dad, Nate's dad, Jamie's dad, Sam's dad, Rebecca's dad, even a whiff of Trent's dad; Ted's relationship with his son, even Phoebe's relationship with her Uncle Roy. We see Nate's mom, but that is almost entirely about Nate's relationship with his dad. The only characters who get to have meaningful ongoing not-about-dads onscreen relationships with their mothers are Rebecca and Nora, which is … weirdly gendered?

But now, with the curtain about to drop on this show, they're doing a Mom Episode. We get two moms we've never met before dropped on us in one hour. We know almost nothing about these moms, because they've never been made central to the story in a way everyone's dads have been; and here, in an episode titled "Mom City," their stories are still mostly about each character's relationship with his dad. 

Even so, those stories need to fit into what we know about Ted and Jamie. "I love meeting people's moms. It's like reading an instruction manual as to why they're nuts," right? Ted and Jamie's moms, introduced here at the eleventh hour, should shine a light on things we already know about these characters and make us think, "this explains so much."

Does Jamie's mom actually explain anything we already knew about Jamie? Does it actually make sense for Jamie to have had, all this time, a sweet, supportive mom available for hugs on demand, or does this just create a lot of new questions the show doesn't have time to answer? I don't think Jamie's mom as we meet her (or his future GBBO star baker stepdad) are fully outside the realm of possibility for his character, but we could've had more time to untangle all of this if they had spent as much time on Jamie's mom as they did on his dad. Instead, I'm left with: you're telling me Jamie Tartt isn't actually touch-starved? Jamie Tartt?

You're telling me Jamie's mom watches all of his matches … but has never been to one? Jamie's mom got him into football and drove him to all of his practices, but he's playing right down the street and she's watching from home? Jamie's mom is this important to him, but never met Keeley? Jamie's mom is this important to him, and we've only ever heard about her as the reverse side of a story about Jamie's dad? There are some drop-ins you just can't make in the eleventh hour.

Also: what is going on here? I'm with Roy. Wow. Wow.

17. Jade really hates working with her boyfriend

Is this really just a way to get Nate back to Richmond? Yes. Is it nonetheless completely valid for Jade to not want to have to hear about Nate's salty nuts scheme after work hours? Also yes. You might be a girlfriend ex machina, but you are nonetheless valid, Jade.

18. OT3 Watch: Jamie's posters

*chinhands* So are they, like … are they doing this on purpose, or … no, they have to be doing it on purpose, right? Right?? Maybe it won't ever go any further than this, because even now I have a hard time imagining an OT3 becoming canon, but they are surely at least tipping their hat to it. 

19: OT3 Watch: walking off arm-in-arm

Surely they aren't going to make it canon.

20. Pep????

They actually brought on Pep Guardiola for a Ted Lasso cameo? In an episode about Manchester City leading the title race, airing in the same week City won the title irl? I'm legit impressed.

21. Jamie's injury drama

This is honestly the dumbest way to generate in-game drama. Jamie goes out on injury and Ted's coaching masterstroke is to act like they've just lost a player to a red card and now have to defend a one goal lead with ten men? Just in case the training staff can shoot Jamie up with enough painkillers to let him finish the game on an injury he couldn't walk on? 

I know Jamie is their star striker and all, but did Sam, Dani, and Colin suddenly lose their scoring abilities when Jamie hurt his ankle? We just had a major subplot last week about what a heater Sam has been on – did that suddenly disappear? Does this team have no ability to adjust to the loss of a player? They've won fifteen straight games!! In real life, that would be one of the longest win streaks in Premier League history! No team becomes that successful without quality substitutes. Just get someone on the pitch, before Manchester fucking City takes advantage of being a man up and gets the equalizer we're told they've been on the verge of for the entire second half.

Why. This is Ted Lasso, why am I getting hung up on its football strategy? This isn't about strategy, it's about Ted and Jamie. Nothing matters except the conversation they're about to have on the sideline. Everything else happens exclusively to allow that conversation to happen. The football is just set dressing. None of this matters.

It's just so dumb, though. God.

22. Jade hates working with her boyfriend so much

Truly next level of her to blackmail her boss to get Nate fired so she can have some peace in the workplace. Does she only exist in this show to advance Nate's storyline? Yes. Is she doing this to be a Good Girlfriend? Yes. Can I ignore both of those things and pretend this is just a badass move by someone who does not care to mix her relationship and her job? Also yes.

23. Ted Lasso and forgiveness

This season's insistence on total forgiveness – that the past is the past, that holding a grudge is a moral failing or a poison of the soul – is one of its biggest flaws. Everything needs to be tied up just so. Characters can't truly grow unless they let go of whatever anger they're holding onto. In the end, everything must come around to wholesomeness and healing. As the show nears its end, it is doing everything it possibly can to wash all slates clean. 

(Except, possibly, with Rupert. We'll see.)

In a void, Ted's mini-speech to Jamie about how he should forgive his dad so that he himself can heal might be – not something I would at all agree with, but fine, in that I don't have to always agree with characters on television shows and Ted is clearly doing some projecting here re: his situation with his mom. But in this broader context of what's going on with Nate, on the sideline of a game, it just feels … forced, and kind of gross. FORGIVE YOUR DAD SO YOU CAN KICK FOOTBALL. FORGIVENESS FIXES EVERYTHING. Okay, Ted Lasso. Okay.

Remember when Dr. Sharon said, "I think you [still hate your father] too, Ted, and that's okay," and they talked about the things Ted both hated and loved about his father, because it was okay for him to hold both of those things inside him at once? Where has that gone?

24. Manchester Loves Jamie

I'm not going to ask what the point of putting Jamie back on for one minute and then substituting him straight off was – do they truly have no one else who could have put them up by two? – because honestly, the City fan ovation was so unbelievable that football strategy pales in comparison. They spent an entire game booing and shit-talking him in the stands, and then he scores a goal on a wobbly foot and they suddenly realize he's Good, Actually and cheer him off? In a game that could decide the league title?

Manchester City could have won the league title right here in this game if Jamie hadn't scored that goal and the City fans cheer him off? In what universe. In what version of reality. Were there no even vaguely believable feel-good moments they could engineer for this game???

25. OT3 Watch: Roy whispering sweet nothings

They aren't going to make it canon, right??

26. Jamie's dad in rehab

This is one of the only "thing we heard nothing about and then suddenly it happens" moments where it makes sense for no one to know what's going on. It's positive growth for a shit character that I can actually get behind and believe in.

Jamie's dad is here doing the work and trying to get better. Instead of having it as an extremely brief reveal in the penultimate episode of the series, imagine if they had done this earlier and shown his dad getting out of rehab, and spent some time on Jamie deciding whether or not to forgive his dad now that his dad is sober. Emphasize the hard parts. Show them building a new relationship as different people. That would be so much more in keeping with the actual themes of this show than the magical thinking this season has engaged in.

27. Pep??????

"Don't worry about wins and losses, just help these guys be the best versions of themselves" from Pep Guardiola is THE MOST TED LASSO version of Pep Guardiola I can imagine. I cackled out loud. I threw back my head and laughed like a woman eating a salad. A+ comedy, intentional or otherwise.

28. Nate hiding under the desk

Why? Why. I mean, I get why – this humanizes everything Nate did in 2.12 and makes him seem like a pathetic guy who can't even ruin a sign right, and retcons some of the most potent parts of Nate's season two arc to make us feel empathy for him where we might not previously have; I had this issue with the rolling chair pratfall video earlier in the season, too – but it just exhausts me. They couldn't spend the time redeeming him organically, so they're rewriting what's already happened to make it seem less bad.

Going back to Ted's funeral therapy session with Dr. Sharon: remember how Ted had this deep, terrible fear of losing someone he loved because he didn't do enough to make them feel their worth, and Nate unknowingly cracked that wide open when he accused Ted of "abandoning" him? Remember how Nate could only feel important if he was the most important person in the room, so being one part of a team felt like rejection – and Nate at the absolute bottom of his spiral, having already tried to ruin Ted's life in the press, tore at him with every emotional weapon he had on hand?

Now we're going to reframe all of that as, "ahhhh, this little guy, can't even do a harm to a desk chair, look at him hide from cleaners, so sad, someone rescue him from restaurant!!"

I'm so ready for this show to end. It'll be easier to pick and choose the parts I want to hang onto once canon is closed.

29. OT3 Watch: champagne

But they aren't going to make it canon, right?????????

Honestly, get someone who looks at you the way Roy looks at Jamie here. Just incredible.

If this is the most OT3 we ever get, it'll be enough.

30. Beard's backstory

Let's pause here a moment.

As a coping mechanism for whatever the show was going to throw at me in this episode, I made myself a bingo card. Every time I got a square, I won a tiny piece of chocolate. I made some of the squares obvious hits, some of them decent possibilities, and some were wild swings at things I knew would never happen.

Earlier in this episode, I hesitated over giving myself the "Beard Backstory" square for Beard and Dottie having nicknames for each other, wondering if that qualified as our Beard backstory for the episode. And then … Beard showed up at Nate's door.

In that moment, I truly felt I had cursed myself with this bingo card. Don't invite possibilities you aren't willing to see play out on-screen, I think is the lesson here?

"Just like in Les Mis." – Nate, and all of us

I really don't know how to feel about this Beard backstory. In theory, I have no issue with Beard having a backstory about being incarcerated for meth and Ted helping him out afterward, but in practice, I'm not sure it makes any sense whatsoever. Beard has a record that no one knows about? He's been an assistant coach in the Premier League for three seasons and it's never popped up in the Daily Mail that he was in prison on a drug conviction? I know in the real world Ted wouldn't be allowed to coach Richmond to begin with, but just how far into fantasyland are we?

(I also have some questions about the "and then I stole his car" twist. What exactly are the writers trying to say here about people freshly out of prison? He had a difficult re-entry, totally understood; he found a place to land, and immediately turned back to crime? Should they maybe have spent a little more time unpacking this story before they made it canon?)

All of that aside, I'm not sure I really wanted a Beard backstory. For the entire run of this show to date, Beard has been something of a Ted-adjacent cryptid with a very clear personality but relatively opaque motivations, whose history we've learned about through wildly random drop-ins that always raise more questions than they answer. He's a guy who roams the city at night and collects subcultures like stamps. He's in an eternally tortured relationship with a manic pixie nightmare girl who somehow suits him perfectly. His devotion to Ted has never, ever been in doubt. 

I just don't think it actually rounds out the character of Beard to know exactly where he's coming from and why he's with Ted. The mystery is part of the character. Introducing an in-depth backstory in the penultimate episode of the entire show feels … kind of cheap? I would completely understand if other people felt it was long overdue and are happy to get it before the end, but to me, pulling back the curtain feels like a misunderstanding of what makes Beard a great character. We don't need to see the man behind the curtain. Being able to wildly speculate about what makes Beard Beard is a big part of his appeal. 

And to drop this in as a plot mechanism for bringing Nate back into the fold – to make this significant change to a major character as a shortcut on Nate's mismanaged path to redemption – I'm just so tired.

This whole thing where Ted emotionally manipulated Beard into forgiving Nate by invoking Ted's own past assistance to Beard – I'm not sure that comes across the way they think it does. Ted wants everyone around him to forgive Nate and the only one who isn't willing to do it is Beard, so Ted forces the issue by hitting Beard where it hurts to get Beard to project his own past trauma onto Nate's situation. Does Ted really think that Beard stealing his car is equivalent to Nate putting his mental health history on the front page of every newspaper in London? Even if he does, why does he think it's fair to Beard to pull out Beard's trauma like a trump card? 

31. Fuck you, Mom!!

What was Ted's relationship with his mother back home, that she comes to visit him in London and within 48 hours, everything he's been holding onto for years comes boiling out of him in a series of F-bombs borrowed from Jamie Tartt? What was their dynamic like in Kansas, that the minute she shows up his shoulders go up around his ears and he can't handle anyone he cares about liking her at all?

Is this happening now because Ted unlocked all of this in therapy? Is it happening now because he's been away from her for so long? Was he not visiting her on those trips to Kansas? Is it the change in setting – having her in London, in his space, meeting his people?

This whole "thank you / fuck you" speech feels overcooked at best, well-acted as it is, and it veers into some really incoherent areas. When Ted tapped his chest, I thought, "oh god, is he impotent in his soul?" Honestly, that would have made more sense than Ted saying he's afraid to get close to his son because "I know he's going to leave."

Yes, Ted is afraid of losing people, but we know because Ted has said so in therapy that his response to that fear is to pull people closer in. To try to make people feel wanted, feel valued, feel good about themselves.

In Ted and Henry's relationship, if Ted has projected his dad onto anyone, it's been himself. If there is a monster under the bed here, it is Ted's fear of turning into his dad, of having the potential for that inside him. That line would have made 110% more sense if it had been, "I'm afraid I'm going to leave," even if we would have had a lot more to unpack on-screen at that point. As it is, it's just – kind of nonsense?

Did they feel like they had to pull out some extra motivation for Ted having been in London all of this time? They didn't. The degree to which they are trying way too hard in some areas and not at all in others sure is something.

32. I've read this fic

Rebecca and Bex? Yeah, I've definitely read this fic. That "Bex divorces Rupert and takes West Ham" square on my bingo card is going to reappear next week.

33. "Do you know what time it is?"

"It's the time of the season when we do X" is a little too much meta self-awareness for me, and the "I'm going to invoke truth bombs as a concept but I don't actually have one" is clunky execution to set up Ted's cliffhanger line, but the staging: flawless. In seasons one and two, Rebecca comes into Ted's office and stands on the left of the frame, facing right. In season three, Ted is the one who comes into the office and stands on the left, reversing their positions both physically and narratively. That kind of attention to detail is A+. 

(I wish they gave that much attention to the plot, but I'll take it where I can get it.)

What's next?

One more episode left to cram in everything they could possibly want to do with this show! We're on a real run here of episodes that cram in abrupt resolutions to ongoing stories while also dropping in a ton of new elements we don't have time to explore, and I wouldn't expect the finale to be all that different.

- Before 3.11, I thought the chances of Ted going back to Kansas were 85% for, 15% against. Now … I think it might actually be closer to 75% for, 25% against?

This episode pushed so hard on sending Ted back to Kansas, and we're being set up in that cliffhanger for him telling Rebecca he's quitting after the season ends, and – there's still an entire finale to go. Will the episode just be one long goodbye, or will there be some last-minute twist to keep him in London? I think the chances of him staying in London are actually slightly better now that the "I'm going back to Kansas" twist isn't being held for the end. Still pretty unlikely, though.

I say again: if he goes back to Kansas, fine, we can fix that in post. If he goes back to Michelle, I'm turning this car around.

- Every social media feed I have has been frantic with speculation as to whether or not they're going to make the OT3 canon in the finale. My money is on Not Canon – I think a wink and a nod at it is as much as they're going to do – but I'll be happy with anything that isn't a flash-forward in which Jamie has a girlfriend. Just let us walk off arm-in-arm-in-arm with room to speculate, show.

- So Nate goes back to Richmond, Ted leaves, and Nate becomes head coach, right? Just like we could pretty easily guess was going to happen before this season even started? There's still a chance of a surprise shake-up there, but I'd put it at, like … 5%. A 5% chance of this not going in the most predictable possible direction.

- If Ted leaves, does Beard stay or does he go? He stays, right? If they try to convince us that Jane is dying to move to Kansas, I'll have to Eternal Sunshine the entire finale from my memory banks.

- I am very much hoping for a thoughtful farewell with the pub trio. They've earned it.

- It's West Ham they're going to be playing in the last game, right? If Nate's West Ham storyline is going to have any meaning, he has to go up against his old team with his old old team in the last game of the season while Rupert's drama plays out in close-up.

There should also be some simultaneous game drama happening with Manchester City. They were four points down before this game, so on the final day of league play, they'll be one point down. If City wins, they win the title. If City draws or loses and Richmond wins, Richmond wins the title. If City loses and Richmond draws, then … actually, there could be interesting last-minute drama if they're trying to break through on goal differential, but I don't think the show would go that far into technicalities. Richmond has to win, right? They aren't going to send the show off on anything less.

Five days until we're free!

[margridarnauds]

🌞 🤩 🤯 for the fanfic writer asks? 💖

Thank you so much!

🌞 Do you have a preferred time of day to write?

Honestly, I probably do my best in the morning when I can wake up refreshed, but since that almost never happens, late at night when there's nothing to disturb me save the ghosts of other things I should be doing.

🤩 Who is your favorite character to write?

All time? For dialogue, probably Heisenberg from RE8; I miss working with him. He has this very blunt, irreverent way of speaking that he sometimes changes out for this very smooth, charismatic way of speaking where he puts a lot of emphasis on every other word (and that is always at risk of falling to pieces because it is NOT his natural state). I'm used to dealing with very aristocratic characters who are restrained, who very rarely let you know what's going on in their head, and who have this very formal way of speaking, so it was and is a joy to break out of it with him. (Raphael is very much a return to form, though he's interesting because of how much more elaborate he is with his speech -- most of my aristocrats have been military nobles to some extent or another, and so they usually have this very clipped way of speaking, but Raphael, despite always being deliberate and calculating in how he's going into a situation, ALSO talks a lot, he ornaments his language a lot. It actually makes it very hard to write him, because it's very much not intuitive for me and it's always tempting to fall back on old habits and use Lazare Voice on him.)

At the moment? Malla. I love Kitrye, but Malla is very fun specifically because she is (1) much more chaotic and (2) has some of the best dialogue, especially when you get her banter with Kitrye. You never know exactly where she's going to land during any given scene, there's always this level of unpredictability to what she's going to do (which has been an ongoing theme because, in her early days, *I* didn't know what she was going to do), and her arrival always marks a turning point. I'm very glad that she dropped into my lap one day, can't imagine doing this without her.

🤯 What's a genre you struggle with as a writer (ex. romance, action, etc.)?

I hate writing smut. It is, bar none, my least favorite genre to write. I enjoy writing about INTIMACY, but not smut. It's very hard to not be self-conscious or to not accidentally fall into doing the same things (...I was about to say "rut"), using the same descriptions for the same actions that A Thousand Other Smutfics Do or, on the reverse, to accidentally ruin it with a single bad line. It isn't that you can relax on the characterization for ANY scene, but with smut, I'm really, really constantly having to think "okay, how would these characters do this in a way that feels real to them", because it's very easy to slip into (...no double entendre intended) porn-isms. And depending on the characters, they can take a scene in an entirely different direction and then you have to readjust for THAT. Angst is fine -- I love tearing people's hearts out and stomping on them, and it's relatively easy to do if people are already inclined to like a character. Humor? Much more difficult to stick the landing on, since it's so subjective, but still relatively easy and intuitive for me, particularly if you're willing to go into crackfic territory, and I have NEVER been particularly attached to upholding the dignity of any of the characters I've written. Action -- Not my favorite, but can still be glanced over especially since, with the exception of RE8, I've rarely NEEDED to write it. Smut? Hate.

...and yet here we are.

[cainluvr69]

Fantasia of the Bookstore Following Footsteps into the Future Chapter 10

Previous Chapter

We got right on moving things around in the store for our tea party. While munching on some delicious sweets and drinking wonderful tea, Arthur cracked open the book. He took a deep breath and then opened the front cover with all the love and care one would give to undoing the ribbon tied around a long-awaited gift.

At that moment, a gentle breeze blew across the open pages. As if caught by the wind, shining white motes of light in the same shape as the flying books fluttered into the air around him.

Arthur: Wah…! Ahaha, it's like a pop-up book!

Shylock: I wonder if that isn't a spell deliberately written in by the wizard who left it here. Although its more aggressive form was a powerful one, this feels much more like it's trying to delight us.

Murr: C'mon, c'mon, turn the page!

Arthur: Okay!

Arthur excitedly turned the page. His blue eyes glittered with curiosity as they focused on the strings of characters, as if they were jumping and dancing with joy.

Arthur: …It seems this book was written by a Sage's wizard, recording things such as their favorite games and pastimes, numerous adventures, and details about humans and wizards they met during their life.

Oz: It seems much like a memoir.

Arthur: Yes. For instance, this page talks about how they ventured into a forest thick with flamewood trees…

Arthur read aloud from the book for Riquet and I, since we were still learning how to read this world's letters. The great adventure through the forest of flamewoods. How to play an odd little game called The Drumming Spiral. A diary entry talking about the longtime friend that taught it to them. This book traced every step of the life of the wizard who had written it.

Arthur: "Here's a game I came up with. All you need is your broom. You can play it anywhere, but somewhere spacious is ideal. It'd also be a good idea to avoid anywhere with a lot of buildings." "It's really simple to actually play. All you have to do is kick up some wind with your magic and ride it with your broom, and then just let yourself get blown wherever it ends up taking you. It's fun to do this in the Forest of Ice, because no matter what you smack into, the snow makes it soft and fluffy."

Riquet: Doesn't this game sound awfully similar to one that you taught us, Lord Arthur?

Cain: It sure does. Between that and how they're a Central wizard who grew up in the North, they sound quite a bit like Arthur.

Oz: …The parts about loving to go on adventures and relentless recklessness are decidedly similar.

Arthur: I was honestly thinking the same thing. I bet if we'd lived in the same era, we could've been wonderful friends.

Arthur ran his fingers over the pages. He smile was the bright and cheerful one of a little boy who'd just made a new friend.

Arthur: But even though we're separated by time, because they left this book behind, I can still read about them. I'm so happy I met this book. I'm so happy it chose me!

My heart felt as warm as Arthur's smile. One day, I would pass my Sage's Manual to someone else, too. I hope that the person who picks it up will smile that way as they read it, too.

Chloe: This is kinda making me want to start writing a book that'll end up in this store one day. Hey, what kinda things do all of you think you'd write?

Murr: Definitely about the moon, yeah?

Shylock: The only person who would ever want to write about that is you, dear. Surely there's only one crazy wizard who fell in love with the moon.

Murr: You think so? Love's a pretty vast thing, you know! So, Shylock, what would you write in your super secret book of secrets? Would it be all about me?

Shylock: Fufu… I'm sure I would write about all the things that catch my fancy.

Chloe: I think I'd want to leave behind my design sketches. I think it'd be nice if someone wanted to still make my clothes even when I'm gone.

Rustica: No matter how much time passes, your designs will always be able to move the hearts of those that see them. I am most certain that your book would become a world treasure.

Chloe: Ehehe… Thanks. What about you, Rustica? What would you want to leave behind?

Rustica: That's quite a difficult question. I'm not sure I'd be able to settle on a satisfactory answer very quickly. May I think on this while drinking tea? I'm sure I'll have an answer by moonrise.

Cain: Ahaha. I bet your book would end up equally refined and carefree. But I don't think I could come up with an answer to what I'd want to leave behind in the end that easily, either.

Riquet: That's very true. I am sure the me of the past would have written about the church. The proper way to be a wizard and the priest's words and such. But I'm sure that I'll have so, so, so many more things I'll want to write about in the future. I used to think I knew everything there was to the world… But now I've learned there's so much more to it than that. The more that I learn, the more I'll want to make sure is recorded for the future. I'm sure of it.

Arthur: I think…I'd want to leave behind everything I've written down in the journal Lord Oz gave me. Although I'd be just as happy simply writing a book on all of his cool points, too.

Oz: If you are writing something to leave behind, it should be about your own…

Cain: Oz's cool points! That's a good one! Since there's so much of him only you get to see, I bet it'd definitely be worth reading.

Arthur: Right?!

Riquet: What about you, Oz? Do you have anything you'd want to leave behind?

Oz: No… I have never put any thought into my turning to stone. Nor about what may happen afterwards.

Riquet: …Oz, I understand how you feel. When I think about how I will one day be no more, it frightens me. I feel very alone. But to reflect on one's passing means to reflect on one's way of life. I think you should put some thought into that too, Oz.

Oz: ……Am I being lectured on the nature of life right now? By a youth of only sixteen years…?

Murr: What about you, Master Sage? What would you write down in a book to be passed on to the next generation?

Akira: Me? Um~mm… Yeah, I definitely think it's gotta be what I've got written down in the Sage's Manual. I'd be happiest leaving behind a record of what I've learned about wizards and what I've experienced here.

Murr: A book about us! I'm super duper looking forward to reading a book all about us written by none other than you, Master Sage!

And so the party got merrier, just like that. Hugo's smile reached all the way to his ears while he listened to the wizards' very…individual ideas when it came to their books.

Arthur: It's so fun listening to everyone's ideas for what kind of book they'd want to write! And it's all thanks to this book for choosing me!

Rustica: <Amores Viesse>

Chloe: Wah, a violin! Rustica, what are you going to play?

Rustica: Something to celebrate Lord Arthur's fated encounter with this book. If you do not mind, sir?

Arthur: Of course not! Hugo, do you mind if he performs here?

Hugo: No, not at all…! Oh, but to imagine that one day I'd get to hear a performance by the one and only Eccentric Musician, Rustica with my own ears!

Cain: In that case, maybe I'll sing along. A party should be good 'n lively, right?

Riquet: I'd like to sing for Lord Arthur too! What about you, Master Sage?

Akira: I'll do my very best!

Rustica began playing a bright and buoyant melody, a song that contained the feelings we all shared for Arthur and his brand-new book. The Western wizards produced their own bells to play alongside him in rhythmical accompaniment, and Hugo rang his own as well. Oz didn't participate in our song. But as he watched Arthur with a warm look in his eyes, I could still tell he was participating in our celebration in his own, placid way.

Arthur: Everyone, thank you so much. Once again, I'd like to state just how happy I am to have received this book. Now I've got even more to write down in my own journal!

I'd have to write about today's little adventure in the Sage's Manual, too. I know that one day, I'll forget all about the people I've met here…but I know that someone else will read what I've left behind. The proof that they and I walked this path together is etched indelibly into these pages.

[crownednova]

I’ve only seen love directed towards RtDLDX, and while I think that’s lovely, I’ve always had several issues with it that I haven’t seen many else talk about. So that’s what I wanna do… talk about it. This was originally gonna be in the form of an essay, but I wrote the first draft half asleep, there is no saving that, and I think more of a point form, individualised analysis would get my point across better. This also means there isn’t going to be much for positives. Pretty much anything I don’t mention should be assumed I am either fine or happy with. Despite that though, I do still think the negatives are enough to cause me to not enjoy RtDLDX, at least not as much as I wish I could. But enough preamble.

New White Wafers Dialogue

Let’s start off with the two least impactful gripes. In fact, I’m just gonna get this one out of the way before getting onto the actual topic. Ability Stars look so much worse now. I get they’re 3D models now, but man, they just look so flat. Where are my RtDL Ability Star fans at? Okay, now to actually begin. All the other changes to Story Mode are great, but wow, I do not like his “Such Easy Targets” line. It feels like a betrayal of his facade. I’ve said in the past that RtDL has my favourite Magolor, which is why this stings. This isn’t like any of his other new/changed dialogue, while his Extra Mode dialogue also stands out, it still feels closer to how he acts. Not to mention, this is him finally being honest. He’s allowed to drop the facade here, it makes sense. But in White Wafers? I just can’t see him saying that. In the original, he does come off as shady, and he does mess up his story, but in a completely different way. I feel a similar slip up is when he calls Kirby a Hero in Cookie Country. At that time, he isn't supposed to know that. He also changes his story from “Just Crash Landing” to “Being Attacked by Landia.” Those are his brand of slip ups, I can’t imagine he’d mess up that badly as to say “Man I love scheming. Oops I mean crocheting ☺️” It’s also a lot more relaxed than what I expect from him. I always interpreted RtDL Magolor as having this stress to his dialogue. His ship is in shambles and he needs to keep up a lie. He still goofs around, but it’s in a completely different tone, it still has undertones of panic. This however, reads more like one of his upgrade lines in the Epilogue. Some may find that appropriate, but Magolor is never written consistently, and trying to add connections only makes things worse. Also, forgot to mention, this is just a straight up spoiler. Sure, the game is 11 years old, but Forgotten Land introduced so many new Kirby fans, people who know nothing about the series, to reveal your biggest twist, especially in a way that feels like a betrayal to the character you’ve written, I just can’t understand the idea behind this change. Because what is the point? I keep asking myself this and I genuinely can’t comprehend it.

Extra Mode Changes

Extra Mode got a glow up in RtDLDX, that’s obvious from the first stages, so then why do I find myself preferring the original? It’s consistent. 1-1 is probably the most fun I’ve had with RtDL in years, so to be greeted by that, only to be met with the exact same mode I’ve played countless times, it’s crushing. It feels like it was set up to get you excited, just to pull the rug from under you. I could get it if it was deliberately there to convince you to buy the game, but if you’ve made it this far, you already own it. So why? While this inconsistency ruins the mode for me, I can’t help but have a more, sympathetic outlook. The original mode is a clear sign this game was rushed, while most of the game, you wouldn’t even be able to tell. I don’t know if those who worked on it were happy with how Extra Mode turned out. Maybe that’s presumptuous of me, but DX was their chance to fix this, but they didn’t. If it isn’t obvious, I think Extra Mode was once again rushed. 1-1, while maybe a bit unfair, still felt like there was love put into it, as much love as the bosses. And 2-1 and 3-1 also got noticeable attention, but much less. The fact the first levels got this attention, makes me feel like they were just developing the levels they could, I can’t explain it as well as I’d like, but it still stands out to me that way. But, while I appreciate the effort, it only makes it feel more unfinished than the original. I’m just so sad about this because this was their only chance to fix the original, it just stands out compared to all the other Extra Modes from the games after. Even something simple like letting Player 1 be Dedede, Meta or Bandee would have done so much for this mode. And, as I’ll soon say, Magolor Epilogue does nothing to circumvent  this. Magolor Epilogue Part 1 - Gameplay That’s right, a two parter! This is gonna be hard though, as I don’t know where my biases begin, and where they end. While this is obviously all subjective, I still would like some ground to stand on. So, I’m gonna start with what I like and what I think works. Let’s start with the bosses. Besides the marketing, which really should have its own section, they’re pretty cool! They innovate on the original bosses, Electicky Dooter is my favourite boss from this game. But it does suck they aren’t more original, or the fact the minibosses are still the same ones from Story and Extra Mode. It just makes the fact all the world bosses were spoiled for us hurt all the more. Next are Ordeal Doors. I love them. They work around the required upgrades so perfectly. Being able to know what the player will have means they can make memorable and fun stages. The regular stages are the exact inverse of this. They’re bland, forgettable, they have to work around the fact that you may never upgrade your abilities. I often see people praise the freedom the upgrade system provides, but I only see the inverse. It’s restrictive. The most the regular stages can do is play around with the boss abilities. However, those are often so weak, done so much better in the Ordeal Stages, or aren’t intuitive for movement that they can’t stand out. The combo system is much more interesting as a mechanic, and the game can properly play around with it, but the upgrades encapsulate everything I dislike about how it feels to play. No, everything I dislike with this whole Epilogue. Magolor Epilogue Part 2 - Tone and Story

I get it’s Kirby, but Kirby has done good and serious stories, so then why is Magolor Epilogue such tonal whiplash. The intro and tutorial capture it perfectly. Magolor almost died, he basically did. He lost his friends, his magic, he’s alone. Good thing he can think uppity thoughts! That’s unfair, I love his upgrade dialogue, I don’t want them to take away the humour, but there has to be some sort of middle ground! Make it clear his jokes are a form of coping, make the pause screens talk about his thoughts rather than vagueing towards Grand Doomer being the final boss 4 times in a row. Give us a look at how he actually feels!!! This is worse in the ending, we never see him actually feel guilt for what he’s done. We’re just told he’s redeemed now, we’re told that on a pause screen that’s not even accessible for 30 seconds!! It’s not even a case of show don’t tell, because they don’t even tell us anything! What I find worse is that he doesn’t even have to confront Kirby to apologise, not really, he literally gets to start living out his dream, stalling until the whole situation blows over until he just gets to show up on Pop Star, somehow, where there is barely any tension left. He gets off easy, he dies, and he gets rewarded for it. LITERALLY TOO!! I’ve never liked his Star Allies moveset. It was so clearly busted, that it felt like he’s stronger without the Master Crown. So in response to this, they canonise this moveset and it’s even more busted. It all comes back to the fact he’s constantly rewarded for his betrayal. He loses nothing. And it’s infuriating, because how am I supposed to expect him to be redeemed when he didn’t have to suffer for anything he did. Sure, he cries at the end of the mode, too bad we never know how he’s feeling anywhere else. They didn’t even answer how he got back to Pop Star, instead answering how he got to the Dream Kingdom. Idk about anyone else, but I just kinda assumed he got there with the Lor, the “real” answer doesn’t feel satisfying at all. He doesn’t even do anything interesting in the Clash games, nothing, not unless we get another Clash sequel. I just, I just wanted him to apologise to Kirby, but instead, it feels like HAL is doing everything in their power to make sure he doesn’t. The worst part is that I’m still hoping for that Clash sequel, I’m waiting for them to execute what they’ve set up, but I just don’t think it’s happening. I just wish I could see what everyone else sees in Epilogue, but I just can’t.

Merry Magoland

I guess I should wrap this up with Magoland. It’s not that bad, but I think it suffered the most from feeling slapped on with no real purpose. I like the Minigames, but I’m more talking about the park itself. I don’t like how it looks. It might just be because I’m not a fan of Magolor’s ego, or at least never saw it being this kind of ego, but it doesn’t work here for me. From what we’ve seen of Magolor’s work in the past, it’s always had this sort of child like aspect to it, like it was made with crayons and cardboard or building blocks. It created a nice aesthetic, albeit, a rather disconnected one, Drum Dash and Dream Collection look nothing alike. But to see them completely ignore what those two set up for a boring DisneyLand parody? Especially one played so positively? Idk, maybe I’m expecting too much asking for another “Capitalism is Bad'' metaphor, but still, Disney is very well known for being a garbage company so???? It’s funny how a place meant to look as innocent as possible is immersion breaking for being as innocent as possible. In reality, it’s not that bad, Manager Magolor acts nothing like Story Mode Magolor, but that’s a consistent thing with all his appearances so whatever I’ve grown to accept it. I just wish Dream Collection and Drum Dash got more love. Especially since Last Land of all things was referenced back in Dream Buffet, I still love that btw. Some sort of visual link might have helped, but even without them, I just think gaudy isn’t Magolor’s style? Like it totally is, but this brand of it doesn’t feel like him. However, I don’t write for him, idk his “true” personality, his “true” taste, maybe he likes Glitter and I can’t stop him. It just serves to make the new stuff feel out of place juxtaposed to the more natural, magical and mechanical settings of Story Mode.

And I guess that’s it, I never want to do this kinda thing again. Being this negative, although my true feelings, is just exhausting. I hope no one agrees with my issues, but if you do, hope it’s nice to see someone talk about it lol. I’m not giving up on this game though, I want to come back in a few months and see how my feelings have changed. I doubt it’ll fix everything, but I hope I can gain a new appreciation for this game, critiques and all. I guess thanks for reading as well, it means a lot to know people care about what I have to say.

[severevoiddragon]

SONGS

First of all, here's the full playlist:

I'll just go through the songs I have full animatics for ! * Means it appears on someone else's list too. Sorry for the amount of (spoilers) I can expand upon them if you don't care bout spoilers :D and if there's any ones you want the full animatic to I can spend 5 hours telling you that too 🥰 not all these songs were chosen by me. They were mostly chosen by one of my besties who originally made the playlist for me n then I made my own version adding my songs. So. Yeah.

All:

She Doesn't Sleep (Anthony Amorim) - This is pretty much describes Arc 1, with Rin coming to Callie like "hey my bestie is acting Weird" n Callie constantly trying to find answers

Curses (The Crane Wives) - This is mostly Cyan focused but also explains arc 2's plot! Spoilers !

Little Lion Man (Mumford & Sons) - Cyan focused recap of the ENTIRE SERIES WOOOO. So spoilers.

Callie:

For the. Main character. Girlie doesn't have their own song animatic

Look Who's Inside Again* (Bo Burnham) (See Charles) - Just in there to show Parallels™

Choke - Acoustic* (I don't know how but they found me) (See Cyan / Other)

Cyan:

Lonely* (Brad Sucks) (See Rin) - Rin and Cyan meeting, and their arcs over arc 2 :D

Body (Mother Mother) - Cyan feeling like they're not in control of themselves sometimes

Waltzing Memories (Priscilla Ahn) - Cyan remembers their sister <3

Our Town (James Taylor) - Cyan remembers what the town used to be like, n tell Rin a bit about themselves

Deep Inside My Heart (Priscilla Ahn) - It's just very cyan coded

Two Birds* (Regina Spektor) (See Rin) - Arc 2 but they are a QPR your honour. Rin is able to move on from Everwich but Cyan isn't </3

Rin:

Nothing Left To Lose* (Tangled: The Series) (See Em) - Arc 2 so spoilers. Cyan is Jeremy Jordan's character (Varian)

Exile, Vilify (The National) - Just Cyan being a weirdo loner who lives in the walls. Like Rattmann from Portal, who this song was written for !

Hiding In Your Hands (Pasek & Paul) - Rin lamenting how she feels depressed despite appearing to have a perfect life (arc 1)

Alone* (Nico Collins) (See Jamie) - Shows the Walker-Ives family n how. Dysfunctional. It is. Including Rins older brother, and how it's the same story throughout all 3 kids and how Rin has to always pick up the pieces

Lonely* (Brad Sucks) (See Cyan)

Sweet Hibiscus Tea (Penelope Scott) - Rin just being a depressed loser tbh (affectionate)

People I Don't Like (UPSHAL) - Rin going to parties when she moves to the city pre arc2 (features cyan briefly)

Our Word (36 Questions) - Yeah Rin's family really aren't the best are they? (The animatic deliberately doesn't line up w the lyrics BC it's like. This is what We said happened, this is what Actually happened)

Seventeen* (Heathers) (See Em) - Rin and Emilia being cute while dating <3

One Thing* (36 Questions) (See Em) - Rin and Emilia having an argument after Rin comes back from the city in arc 2

Brutal (Olivia Rodrigo) - Rin leaving Everwich feeling very upset n annoyed at everyone else

Woke Up (Adventure Time) - The Breakup <3

Choke - Acoustic* (I Don't Know How But They Found Me) (See Cyan/Other)

Two Birds* (Regina Spektor) (See Cyan)

I've Had Enough* (Melina KB) (See Em) - The Breakup Part 2 <3

Emilia:

Monster (Frozen the Musical) - Uhhh arc 1 spoilers were close to discovering so I'm keeping these very spoilers

Asher:

Love Like You (Rebecca Sugar) - Em simping for Rin <3

Cloud 9 (Beach Bunny) - See above tbh

Chosen Last (Sara Kays) - Em feeling like an outsider of the friend group BC she joined late

Seventeen* (Heathers) (See Rin)

One Thing* (36 Questions) (See Rin)

Moral of the Story (Ashe) - Em convincing herself that it's okay if a relationship didn't work out

Words Fail (Dear Evan Hansen) - Em apologising at the end of arc 2

Rearview (Beach Bunny) - Em being upset after The Breakup™

The Dismemberment Song (Blue Kid) - This is just villain au em but it's fun

Little Miss Perfect (Joriah Kwamé) - Em discovering she likes Rin :D

Prom Queen (Beach Bunny) - There's a lot of Beach Bunny. Em and her body image issues that i never talk about

Nothing Left to Lose* (Tangled: The Series) (See Cyan)

I've Had Enough* (Melina KB) (See Rin)

Xavier:

Sports Go Sports (Garfunkel and Oats) - Asher cheering Xavier on during his sports games <3

The Bro Duet* (George Salazar, Jason Grotay) (See Xavier) - Just Xavier and Asher being gay idiots in love (affectionate) (arc 1 version)

I'll Cover You* (Rent) (See Xavier) - Just Xavier and Asher being gay idiots in love (affectionate) (arc 2 version)

Heather (Conan Gray) - um. Spoilers.

Happier (Olivier Rodrigo) - um. More spoilers. For the same reason.

Jamie:

The Bro Duet* (George Salazar, Jason Grotay) (See Asher)

I'll Cover You* (Rent) (See Asher)

Charles:

Alone (Nico Collins) (See Rin)

Disobedient (Steven Universe) - Arc 2 Jamie after Rin leaves and then comes back (she's not okay)

Kitty:

This Is Home (Cavetown) - Charles at Kitty's Ball, and The Aftermath

Duet* (Omori) (See Kitty) - THEY ARE MARI AND SUNNY CODED OKAY. Charles plays piano, Kitty plays violin. It just fits.

Look Who's Inside Again* (Bo Burnham) (See Callie) - Charles being a kid who was stuck in his room. There isn't much more to say about it. (Also shows the parallels between him n Callie)

In The Bedroom Down The Hall (Pasek & Paul) - Not TECHNICALLY Charles BC it's his mum, but it's Charles' mum lamenting the empty room after he disappeared, and then Em's mum lamenting her growing apart from Aiden (Em's twin brother), and Rin's mum lamenting the constant fights it is with Rin's brother

Duet* (Omori) (See Charles)

First Burn (Lin Manuel-Miranda) - An AU where Kitty actually sent a love letter to her lover, and Other messed it all up for her.

Floating (Pretty Balanced) - Kitty and her lover </3 it's a tragic tale

Cyan / Other (This is either Other itself, Other And Cyan or Cyan About Other):

Under My Skin (Jukebox The Ghost) - Other being a menace

Evelyn Evelyn (Evelyn Evelyn) - During Arc 1 when Cyan realised Other is a dirty liar and isn't actually good (it manipulated cyan into thinking that. Because it's a dirty little liar.)

Goodbye (Bo Burnham) - spoilers :)

Choke - Acoustic* (I Don't Know How But They Found Me) (See Callie & Rin) - Other possessing Cyan during arc 2. It doesn't go well.

Nocturnal Me (Echo and the Bunnymen) - Other being a menace to Cyan

Every Breath You Take (The Police) - Other being a menace to Cyan

Play With Me (Extreme) - Other being a menace to Cyan)

We'll Meet Again (Vera Lynn) - ohhh this is Other at the end of arc 1 :)

Insane (Black Gryph0n) - Look I dislike the creator of Hazbin for many reasons and the series reminds me of an ex friend now but. You gotta admit this song is Other all over. Specifically Other at the start of act 2 when Cyan returns

Some fun facts about SoE that have no meaning in no order just when I thought of them

Rin n co studied Jekyll and Hyde for English GCSE (which was at the same time as SoE was happening). Because of this, when she was an adult, she recommended the book to Cyan, who hadn't read it before. They read it n went "omg lol this is me", much to Rin's concern

Cyan has an older sister who I don't talk about enough- but also they don't remember her at all so it doesn't matter (<- definitely has a name for her yep)

Callie is an unreliable narrator (ik I said this a couple days ago but expanding on it a lil - there are some parts she is intentionally hiding from the audience. she has slipped up a couple times while trying to keep these hidden things hidden)

I've written up to episode 11 (the denouement) but I'm unsure of pacing and everything so :( idk :( I like Episode 6 so I'm posting at least all 3 parts of that (there's one more Episode 6 hehe)

I have a whole Bad Ending AU which I'm tempted to get you guys to vote on which ending. Except I won't tell you which ending you get. This will only come into play at the end of arc 2 and tbh this is motivating me to finish arc 1-

Cyan loves fireworks and once they're besties w Callie, she invites them to their annual new year's celebrations. The town of Everwich is invited but Cyan used to just sneak in. It makes Cyan happy they finally are allowed to come <3

Kitty was NOT interested in James Beaumont, the guy she was likely to marry. She did not know this. She thought all girls wanted to hug and kiss their friends. This is because she was in the Georgian era.

Charles n Callie have SO MANY PARALLELS. BUT I CANT SHARE THEM. BECAUSE SPOILERS.

Callie is the only one other than cyan to be able to see Other :)

If anyone wants to hear about the music for my ocs pls ask BC I have a lot of Thoughts™ about those

[khizuo]

what worries me so much about c!phil. is that i'm afraid that he's not being deliberately written as a hypocritical asshole. like when we were all scared that c!wilbur had become a c!dream apologist when he was getting revived we got lore streams later that confirmed that cc!wilbur knew what he was doing. but c!phil has been a hypocritical victim-blamer for almost a year now and we've gotten no streams that confirm that it's deliberately leading to something narratively.

like. this isn't me suggesting things about cc!phil or Anything. in a roleplay it's easier to write a hypocritical character than you think, if you are in the mindset that Your Character Is Really Awesome And You Want To Show That. it's easier to ignore context when you're only one person in a story that's being written by many people instead of being the singular writer. and so i'm legitimately worried that cc!phil doesn't exactly know how his character is coming off and that this is all meant to make himself out to be right. I really really hope cc!tommy doesn't let that happen.

[voxofthevoid]

Being an extremely picky reader, I have a lot of sympathy for people who can't find the kind of fic they want to read, who don't resonate with many popular fanon, who have tastes that just aren't often addressed in most fic. The smaller the fandom, the worse off these woes, usually. What I don't give two shuddering shits about are the folks who make this the authors' problem.

Fanfic detractors love to say it's not real writing, but even putting aside the 101 ways that's total bullshit, the sheer act of writing takes time. At my fastest, I could write maximum 1200 words an hour; these days, it's closer to 500. Yet, you have so many writers churning out fic after fic, ranging from bite-sized bits to epic-length monstrosities. That's hours and hours of our lives. I set aside 2–3 hours a day for writing, and you can bet those add up fast.

So here you have these people creating scores of content for the hell of it, putting it up for free, and expecting damn near nothing in return. There are outliers, of course, but the general sentiment I've seen is that we don't want money, and we don't demand comments, though we appreciate the everloving shit out of them. At the core of it, writing fic is a labour of love, and fandom is a gift economy.

You know what's not a gift? Being a little shit in the comment/ask boxes of your local fandom writers.

It's fine, absolutely a-okay, spectacularly acceptable to not like or even viscerally hate any given character, trope, ship, or even specific fic. But listen, that's a you problem—and it doesn't have to be problem at all if you just click that pretty X and exit the story posthaste. The author won't even know you'd been there, and you're free to go wash out the taste of whatever fuckery made you nope out. If you're inclined toward writing yourself, you can even give the tried-and-true art of writing out of spite a go.

But, for the love of god, don't hop into the comment box and list all the ways in which the author could've made the story the one you wanted.

It's not your story. It's also clearly not for you. The writer wrote the story they wanted the way they wanted it. Leave it the fuck alone.

Some writers may ask for concrit; feel free to give it, provided you've nailed the constructive part of constructive criticism.

But their writing has typos and grammar errors: Shit happens, and we're not robots. Ignore it, or if you can't stand it, stop reading.

But it'd have been better if it was another ship/character/direction: That's your opinion, which will remain valid for only as long as it stays solely in your head. Again, stop reading. Exit quietly.

But the content is problematic: My brother in Christ, it was meant to be. We're not all pearl-clutching puritans. Stop reading things that upset you, especially if they're tagged!

Harassing authors won't get you the content you want. Nor, for that matter, will politely pestering them make them see the holy light of whatever crusade you're on. Most you'll manage is break the confidence of a fledgling writer or drive someone vulnerable out of fandom. And if that's your endgame, you're the kind of trash a handful of words from voxofthevoid.tungle.com can't change, so fuck you anyway.

Creativity begets more creativity. In every fandom I've written for, I started writing because, after a point, reading wasn't enough. I have specific tastes that don't always align with broader fandom tastes—for instance, I like out-and-proud sadists and writing my favs as tops/doms, whereas the predominant trends seem to favor the opposite. I also like very specific kinds of fuckery with my fluff, which are often hard to find. All that's fine. I have MS Word and the will to use it.

Granted, writing fic deliberately tailored to my tastes isn't the same as reading fic that's coincidentally tailored to my tastes, but that's fine too. I can be immeasurably grateful to the wonderful folks whose writing does strike a chord in me while also endeavouring to one day make someone say, "Damn, voxofthevoid, this is exactly the story I needed." That's what I want to give to fandom.

Others are free to think, "Yikes, voxofthevoid, you're fucked in the head," and be on their merry way; just don't make it my problem.

And if you, personally, don't have the time or inclination to be the porn fic you want to see in the world, there are other ways to encourage the kind of content you want to see. Participate in fandom exchanges. Seek out writers that take prompts or requests. Send positive encouragement (not rude demands) to the writers whose work you enjoy.

Don't throw a tantrum in the comment/ask box. It helps no one. It pisses off a lot of people. Nobody benefits.

Sincerely,

Someone who's very, very tired of seeing entitled shits make fandom a nightmare for everyone

[c-is-for-circinate]

Wait, isn't "anti" stuff more like "anti-pedophilia" and stuff? Like, you have a point about anti-porn attitudes, but from what I've heard just "anti" on its own means against stuff like kid porn and incest porn and legitimately f*cked up sh*t like that.

Okay!  So this, I think, is actually a great example of what I was talking about, and a really useful thing to understand.  (CW rape, child abuse, etc)

Smarter people than me have written much better essays about why policing thoughtcrimes is a bad road to go down, and I will probably reblog some of them next time they cross my dash for more context.  What I want to talk about is the trigger mechanism, the ‘oh, this looks like danger!!!’ immune response in how we look at different kinds of porn, and how that applies to anti culture.

Here’s the thing: I am anti-pedophilia.  I think that, for most people, that’s a stance that largely goes without saying!  Adults who prey on children are bad.  I’m also against incest; relatives who prey on their family members are bad.  Above all I oppose rape.  Sexual predation of any kind is bad.  In fact, I’d say that’s the most important item on the list.  There is plenty of room to argue about where the lines are between ‘adult’ and ‘child’ and how teenagers fit in the middle, and there’s plenty of room to get historical about the lines between ethically terrible incest, distasteful-but-bearable “aristocratic inbreeding” between distant cousins, and the kind of consanguinity that tends to develop in a small town where everyone’s vaguely related to everyone else by now anyway.  The core of the issue is consent, and it has always been consent.  Pedophilia and incest are horrific because they are rape scenarios where the abuser has far more power and their victim far fewer resources to cope, both practically and emotionally; because harm to children is, to us as a culture, worse than harm to adults, for a lot of very valid reasons; and because they constitute betrayal of trust the victim should have been able to put in their abuser as well as rape--but they are all rape scenarios, and that’s why they’re awful. 

These things are bad.  It is good for us to have a social immune response system that recognizes these things when they’re happening and insists we step in.  That is a good thing to develop!  It helps us, as a society.  It can help the people being victimized.  It’s the same reason educators and childcare workers in the US are all mandated reporters, why we do background checks on people working near kids.  These things happen, and they’re terrible, and it’s good that we try to be aware and prepared for them.  (Though obviously studies show we’re a lot less good at protecting the vulnerable than we’d like to pretend we are.)

The question is: why does that same social immune response trigger, and trigger so angrily, in response to fiction?

Anti culture is fundamentally an expression of that social immune response.  Specifically, it’s that social immune response when it is set off by a situation that, while it has some similarities to the very bad real-life crime of sexual predation including pedophilia and incest, is in and of itself harmless.

If you’re instinct is to flare up in anger or dismissiveness because I’m calling these things harmless, I want to ask you to just take a deep breath and bear with me for a bit longer.  What you’re feeling right now is an allergic reaction.

Humans tell and read and listen to stories about “legitimately fucked up shit” all the time.  It’s part of the human condition.  It’s part of how we process those things happening, not just to use, but to other people in the world around us.  It’s part of how we process completely unrelated fucked-up shit, playing with fears and furies and insecurities that we all have, through so may layers of fiction that we don’t even recognize them any more, playing with power dynamics in metaphor and making characters suffer for fun.  Aside from the fact that literally all stories do this to some extent or another; aside from the fact that drawing lines between ‘ok that’s good storytelling’ and ‘that’s too fucked-up to write about’ is arbitrary, subjective, and dangerous in its own right; aside from all of that, these stories are stories.  All of them. 

Even the ones about rape, about incest, about pedophilia.  They’re words on a page.  No real children were harmed, touched, or even glanced at in the making of this work of fiction.  This story, pornographic though it may be, is part of a conversation between consenting adults.  (And if a teenager lies about their age to consent, that is a different problem altogether.)

Stories in and of themselves, no matter what they’re about, are no more dangerous than a crate full of oranges.  Which is to say: utterly harmless, unless all you have to eat is oranges, all day every day, and you find yourself dying slowly of nutrient deficiency--which is why representation matters.  Or unless someone wields one deliberately, violently, as a tool to cause harm, and someone gets acid in their eye--which is the fault of the person holding the orange. And unless you happen to be allergic to citrus.

The key here is this twofold understanding:  First, the thing that hurts you can also have value to others.  Real, legitimate value.  Whether you’ve undergone trauma and certain story elements are straight-up PTSD triggers or you just don’t like orange juice, that story, those tropes, that crate of oranges may be somewhere between icky and fundamentally abhorrent--but we understand that that is still your reaction.  Even if you don’t understand how anybody could ever enjoy it; even if every single person you surround yourself with is as sensitive and disgusted and itchy about this thing that makes your eyes hurt and your throat stop working as you; that doesn’t make it true for everyone.  That doesn’t make oranges poisonous.  No real children were involved in the writing of this story.  It is words on a page.

But, secondly: the thing that has value to others can also hurt you.  Just because a story isn’t inherently poison doesn’t mean it can’t cause you, personally, pain.  That’s what a PTSD trigger is: an allergic reaction, psychological anaphylaxis, a brain that’s trying so hard to protect its own from a threat that isn’t actually present (but was once, and the brain is trained to respond) that it causes far more harm and misery than the trigger itself possibly could.  And no, it’s not just people with PTSD who sometimes get hurt by stories.  There are many, many ways a story can poke the part of your brain that says, this is Bad, I don’t like this, I don’t want to be here.  The story is still, always, every time, pixels on a screen and ink on paper.  The story causes no physical harm.  But it can poke your brain into misery, it can stir up your emotions, it can make you want to cringe and run away.  It can make you want to scream and fight and go after the author who brought this thing into existence.  It can make you hurt.

This is an allergic reaction.  This is your brain and body, your reflexes and instincts, trying to protect you from something that isn’t really happening.  And just like a literal allergic reaction, it can do actual harm to you if it gets set off.  This is real.  The fact that stories can upset you to the point of pain and mental/emotional injury is real, even though it’s coming from your own brain and not the story itself.  There are stories you shouldn’t read.  There are stories I shouldn’t read, regret reading, will never read, because they hurt me.  That doesn’t mean they’re the same stories that would hurt you.  That doesn’t mean they don’t have value.

And, finally:

If getting upset about stories is fundamentally an individual person’s allergic reaction, their brain freaking out and firing off painful survival instincts in the face of a thing that isn’t, in and of itself, a threat?  Then the anti movement is a cultural allergic reaction.

Fandom as a whole has a pretty active immune system, which doesn’t mean we have a good immune system.  We try very hard to be aware of all the viruses and -isms and abuse and manipulation and cruelty, both systematic and individual, that exists around and within our community.  We’re primed and ready to shout about things at all times.  The anti movement is that system, that culture, screaming and shouting and fighting at a harmless thing on a grand scale.  It wants to stop that thing, that scary awful thing that trips all of its well-primed danger sensors, at all costs.  It’ll swell up and block off our airways (our archives) if it has to.  It’ll turn on the body it came from.  It’s scared and protective and trying to fight, and it’s ready to fight and destroy itself.

Luckily, fans and fanfic and fandom and fan culture are a lot bigger and older than they often get credit for, and it’s not like these cultural allergies are anything new.  We could talk about shippers and slashers in the X-Files fandom in the 90s.  We could talk about the birth of fandom in the days of Star Trek.  We could talk about censorship and book burning going back centuries.  We survived that and we’ll survive this, too.

But god, does the anti movement my throat and eyes itch.  Man is it irritating, and sometimes a little suffocating, to realize how many stories just aren’t getting told out of fear of what the antis will say.  And that’s the real danger, I think.  What are we losing that would have so much value to someone?  What are we missing out?

[maniac-reboggles]

Okay... So about the name thing... So from what I've heard of the show and how they're going about Harvey's character, it sounds likely that they're going with some form of his backstory that's inspired by the story, Eye of the Beholder. The 'blackouts' that Harvey is apparently going to experience are likely going to be him switching who's at the front with his 'darker alter ego.'

So something about Harvey Dent: In many of the modern iterations of his character, he's plural. He tends to have Dissociative Identity Disorder (previously referred to as "Multiple Personality Disorder." Also commonly referred to as having a "split personality") or something similar. He's in essence two (on the rare occasion more) people that live in the same body together. If the writers of the show have done their homework and are gong to be making a well-written iteration of the character, Harvey Dent should have been plural since he was a kid with this 'dark alter ego' being there for just about as long as he can remember. He just suppressed this other person sharing this body with him so much that no one else could tell he was there.

Generally speaking, Harvey could be considered the 'host' of their system, or the original inhabitant of the body, and his 'dark alter ego'... Well... He hasn't really ever been given a consistent name... As Batman fans, we generally tend to refer to him as 'Two-Face' (which is also the name of their combined criminal identity) but some will refer to him as 'Big Bad Harv' (from Batman: the Animated Series). I tend to call him 'Harvey's Associate' (from Batman: the Audio Adventures) because that's the only actual way other than 'Two-Face' or 'Harvey' that I've seen him refer to himself by. So actually, I am a little deliberate in still calling him Harvey even after his scarring. Basically, 'Harvey Dent' is their legal identity and what you can refer to the body by. Harvey Dent's 'good side' is named 'Harvey.' 'Two-Face' is Harvey Dent's criminal moniker. Harvey Dent's 'bad side' doesn't really have his own name, but people generally refer to him as 'Two-Face.' Both Harvey and his Associate will respond if you call either or both of them 'Harvey' or 'Two-Face.' Characters in-universe use these names interchangeably. Is this confusing? Yes! :D But DC hasn't made it easy on us and shows no signs of making it any easier on us any time soon! :D (Many many years ago, they tried to give the Associate an actual name... But that story sucked so everyone decided to ignore it!)

So there's your very long explanation on the naming thing! As for the rest, when he's written well, Harvey still tends to be present even after Two-Face becomes a thing. They can often be seen co-fronting. Basically, they interchangeably have control over the body and will even interrupt one another or argue with each other while talking. Even when Harvey's Associate is in full control of the body, Harvey is often still aware of what's going on around them, and can be seen making comments on whatever Two-Face is doing, even if he isn't actually able to take control of the body at the moment and can't physically say anything. In these instances, the Associate can hear him and sass back at Harvey if he wants. Vice versa if control over the body is reversed.

And yeah... In the comics, they have had shown several times that Harvey can get better! But sadly, none have yet to really commit on this idea... Sometimes he even gets his face fixed, and he goes back to living his life as Harvey Dent and not Two-Face... But sadly, something always comes up and he ends up destroying his face again... Also a lot of the time, the writers think that Harvey 'getting better' is him fixing his face, and getting rid of his associate. But I STRONGLY disagree with that! I think that for him to truly get better, he should keep his scars and learn how to peacefully co-exist with his associate! His plurality shouldn't be what makes him a villain! His associate shouldn't just be evil (which is often how he's portrayed)! Ultimately alls that his associate should want is to protect Harvey! But he's become angry and violent for being suppressed for so long and unable to live, locked in the darkness for so long. For him to get better, Harvey needs his associate's help, and together they can work through their trauma and get to a place where they no longer feel controlled by their compulsions! But sadly, this is an idea that only the most recent pieces of Batman media involving Harvey have touched upon. And by most recent, I mean that very literally. As in the current arc going on in Detective Comics and Batman: the Audio Adventures!

In any case, I hope that you don't mind how much I've rambled on here. I don't plan on watching Gotham Knights, but if there are any questions or anything about the show that you're curious about or want me to comment on, I'd be more than happy to do so to the best of my ability! I'm perfectly alright with you Misha stans being in our Two-Face space, and am just very much hoping that this ends up being a good iteration of the character!

Looking at the Harvey Dent tag recently has been an... Interesting experience given that I've never watched Supernatural and know next to nothing about Misha Collins. But I've been having fun looking at the mishaposting and reading through the tags. After all, they're still posts about Harvey, which is good, and if people are happy and excited over seeing my guy, that that's exciting for me too! Even if it is because of the actor that plays him and not for the character himself.

But while I'm here... Dear Misha stans. I see your concerns of Harvey turning into a villain and how you guys keep saying that you can't imagine actually seeing Harvey as actually being evil because of your adoration for Misha. Well, I just want to say that you don't have anything to worry about. When Harvey Dent is written well, he's barely even a villain. Even after he becomes Two-Face, when he's written well, he really is a character that you like and want to see get better. He remains Bruce's best friend even after committing crimes and Bruce is always trying to help him because he's still likable and is more a victim of his circumstances than anything else. Harvey as a villain doesn't tend to particularly enjoy doing crimes a lot of the time. He does crimes to protect himself, because he feels that he needs to do them to survive, and above everything else, he does crimes because he has a compulsory NEED to. Often, he would like to stop doing them and get better. He doesn't like that he has to do it. But he HAS to do it because of the nature of his compulsions. He can't help himself. When he's written well, Harvey Dent is barely a villain and remains sympathetic to the audience. He's still capable of doing good, but he needs permission to do so from the coin. When he's written well, you should want Harvey to get help and to heal above everything else.

Harvey Dent is supposed to be a good man trying his best to do right by this city that he loves. He rises quickly, and people look up to him, hoping that he can save the people of this city from the darkness that consumes it. Which makes it all the more tragic when he eventually fails and succumbs to the darkness just like everyone else in Gotham.

So I suppose that you could say that Harvey is something of... A fallen angel...? (HAH! I know next to nothing about Supernatural.)

[wistfulcynic]

⭐️

why would you do this to me, the excess of choice is paralysing. choose a fic and choose a scene to talk about. gaaah.

okay. i actually think i am going to take this as an opportunity to impose some Thoughts on the internet, specifically Thoughts about adapting characters whose source material is set in the past, into modern AUs. One of the most frequent bits of feedback i get is remarks on how the characters as i write them still feel very true to themselves, even translated into a modern setting. And while i certainly am not the only person with a knack for that, i do think it's a knack not everyone has. So i'm gonna talk about it.

ultimately, it's about identifying key character traits and then determining if or how these traits would be affected by the character growing up in a different environment. Part of that is deciding if those traits are something intrinsic or if they are mostly cultivated by the canon environment. That's a nature/nurture question and can be very difficult to answer and likely there isn't a single 'right' answer, but it's more than worth the time to think about it. Too often i see AUs where the characters are either exactly the same as their canon selves, incongruously, because they couldn't have had any of the experiences that shaped them in their canon worlds. On the opposite end of that spectrum there are the characters who in modern AUs are written as bland archetypes, with no real thought given to the intrinsic traits of their canon selves that would affect their choices away from that archetype, even in a modern setting.

obviously reasonable people can disagree about what aspects of a character might be intrinsic and what aren’t and also about how those traits would manifest in modern behaviour. And there’s also the fact that character interpretation is always filtered through the writer’s own personality, experiences, preferences, etc. Despite this, i believe that if you present the character in your modern AU in a way that makes sense within the universe that you create, then even people who see that character differently in their own heads will easily be able to accept your version of them. 

if we could consider Pride and Prejudice’s Elizabeth Bennet. In my P&P modern AU (A World in Lilac Hues for anyone interested) i made Elizabeth an artist. This was a very deliberate choice. It’s a career that would allow her the latitude to be her very independent self, respectable but also just edgy enough to make her someone Darcy would look askance at. This choice is based on my feeling that independence of thought, opinion, and action are intrinsic traits of Elizabeth and ones important enough that they would influence her choice of career. Which isn’t to say that it’s impossible to have a modern Elizabeth Bennet working in a shop, for example, only that the fic would have to make some effort to justify why a character whose canon self is so defined by independence and also by a certain degree of privilege, has ended up in that sort of job. Without that in-universe justification, the character doesn’t feel like herself but more like a Standard Romcom Archetype wearing Elizabeth’s name. Which is, i would argue, ultimately not a satisfying experience for readers. They may enjoy the fic anyway because of the plot or the quality of the writing, but if you have to do too many mental gymnastics to justify why the characters are behaving in ways that seem OOC for them, it’s not really reading fanfic anymore but just a modern-set romance. (nothing wrong with that of course, it’s just not what i sign up for as a fanfic reader). 

this is also why i really vehemently dislike the fandom trend to see your OTP in every.single.thing. Not every movie/tv show/anything works as an AU for every character. Some do, and well. Others do, but less convincingly. Some require so many changes to be made to the characters’ intrinsic traits that they become unrecognisable as their canon selves. There’s just no satisfying in-universe reason for them to behave the way they do, because the reason is “the author wanted to write an AU of X thing, and didn’t think about it any further than that.” It’s probably my biggest fandom bugbear at the moment. Obviously people can and should write whatever they like, but sometimes i wonder why they decide to write things that require them to change the characters beyond recognition. Surely that defeats the purpose of writing fanfic? But i guess that’s a rant for a future Wall of Text. 

anyway. i’d apologise for this Wall of Text except you did send me the star and these are the deadly consequences 😘. 

-

want a director’s cut take on my fics? just ask!