#its like both sets are different sides of a generation spectrum

[robots-here-and-there]

Canon lore about first generation IDW Transformers that lives rent free in my head:

Ratchet and Drift are around the same age Megatron and Rodimus are around the same age

[olderthannetfic]

Now I'm wondering how countries like Japan and China teach literacy.

Since kanji / hanzi don't really have that much in the way of phonetic elements, they kinda have to teach them by memorization and I don't think they have many reading comprehension problems over there.

(Although both countries do have supplementary phonetic writing systems in the form of bopomofo and pinyin for China, and the kanas for Japan)

--

FAVORITE SOAPBOX TOPIC UNLOCKED!

RELEASE THE KRAKEN!

It's a little closer to teaching vocabulary than spelling, but the same kinds of principles apply: You teach the building blocks, like the traditional radicals, which aren't so different from teaching Latin and Greek roots in an English class for English speakers.

And, as a matter of fact, lots of those radicals do predict pronunciation, just not in every single case. They can also be clues to meaning, but again, not absolutely consistently. Many characters have a sound-cueing radical on one side and a meaning-cueing radical on the other. It's just that only some are still useful in the modern day, while others are more like the English word 'plumbing' where knowledge of Roman lead pipes explains why this word comes from the one for lead, but the root probably wouldn't help a kid learn the word in the first place.

One similarity to teaching phonics would be teaching students to tell very complicated and similar characters apart: you want to help a student spot all the little building blocks of the character and then spot the ones that are different, not just glance at the whole character and get a general overall vibe. If you do a whole look-based approach, too many characters are too easy to mistake for one another.

Remembering a bajillion Chinese characters is hard if you're trying to memorize them in a year and not all of elementary school, but I think people who don't read them underestimate how many component parts there are and how approachable they can be if you start by learning fundamentals, not just memorizing a few individual characters as though they have no relation to anything else.

They're actually pretty systematic, just in the way that English spelling is with its overlapping systems and historical artifacts, not in the way that highly regular Spanish spelling is.

Having taken a lot of Japanese classes, I will say that Japanese as a foreign language textbooks often do a piss poor job of this and totally do teach kanji in a sight words-y way... But my Mandarin class started with important foundational concepts that served me well in Japanese later even if I bombed out of Chinese class at the time.

Can you tell how irritated I am by all the foreign language learners who think characters are sooooo hard when, really, it's just their crappy textbook? Haha.

They're moderately hard in the way that learning a full adult spectrum of vocabulary is hard, but people do that for foreign languages all the time. The countries that use characters do tend to make sets that are smaller for certain kinds of applications, same as we have things like simple English wikipedia, but a literate adult will always know lots more, whether it's from their career in engineering or their predilection for historical romance novels.

Uh... anyway, the answer is "Bit by bit in elementary school, just like in any other country".

[deafaq]

Could you explain a little about the difference between PSE (Pidgin Signed English) and ASL (American Sign Language) or at least point me to a scholarly article on that?

I know SEE (Signed Exact English) is used more in an educational setting to teach English structure and grammar to a young deaf student, but as they get older, it naturally transforms (for lack of a better term on my end) into ASL. I'm just unsure where and how PSE would fit into the Deaf community as a whole.

Thank you.

Hello,

lets get some general linguistic info out there first.

"pidgin" is a linguistic term. Its not its own language, but a means of communication which emerges when two language speakers meet who don't share a common language. The resulting communication usually contains grammar and vocabulary from both languages in a mix of both. Its also simplified. Additionally, its not anyone's first language they learn from their parents.

Pidgin often happened in areas with European traders and/or colonizers and/or slavers. Pidgins can sometimes evolve into "creoles" - meaning they become someone's first language.

So, to PSE, SEE and ASL specifically:

ASL is its own language with grammar and vocabulary, which has no connection to English. It emerged naturally (aka it wasn't created by one guy) and its a native language of USA Deaf community. (and elsewhere)

SEE is a artificial creation. Its mostly ASL vocabulary but with English grammar - with additions for words which do not exist in ASL. Its mostly used in schools.

PSE is combination of both ASL and English. It can emerge in conversation between two people where one person is hearing and other is deaf. Often, the grammar is more "English-y" while signs come from ASL, but the rules are not set in stone like with SEE. Its very individual. The reason for this occurring is usually hearing person with limited knowledge of ASL and deaf person with limited knowledge of English trying to communicate.

Imagine SEE and ASL on opposite side of one spectrum. PSE is somewhere between them and moving, depending on the situation and the speaker.

While in past, term "Pidgin Signed English" was preferred, now its fallen out of favor with linguists. The preferred term is "contact signing" . Sometimes, "Conceptually Accurate Signed English" (CASE) is also used.

I see PSE/contact signing in "action" often - most commonly with hearing teachers + deaf students or hearing social workers who sign + deaf clients. In casual conversation, correct grammar often isn't the most crucial, transfer of information is. Also, unlike with spoken language, you technically use both languages at the same time. So its often person speaking aloud and using sings with it - the English by itself sounds weird (wrong word order or different terms used) and the signs by themselves wouldn't make sense either, but the combination can be understood.

Hope this helped,

Mod T

[androgyne-homosapiens]

Androgyne gender identity

Definition:

Androgyne, androgyn or androgynous gender, is an identity under the nonbinary and transgender umbrellas. Androgynes have a gender identity that can be a blend of both or neither of the binary genders. They may describe this as being between female and male, between man and woman, between masculine and feminine or simply 'in between.' They can also identify as neither feminine or masculine, or neither female and male.

from the nonbinary wiki

As stated in the definition, androgyne people are trans (they don't identify exclusively as the gender they were assigned at birth), and nonbinary (they are not one of the binary genders). Of course it is up to an individual to choose the words they use to identify themselves with.

The word androgyne has an interesting history, at times it was used as an umbrella term similar to nonbinary (I won't go in to much more detail here, but there is more info in the nonbinary wiki).

androgyne, androgyny, androgynous

As a rule, androgyne refers to a gender identity, while Androgyny refers to gender expression (androgynous would be the word used to describe an individual using androgyny as their gender expression). A person may identify as androgyne, and not be androgynous, and a person my be androgynous and not identify as androgyne.

But the split isn't quite so clear. In theory:

Androgyny is a wide category of gender expression that either mixes or omits markers of both feminine and masculine gender expression.

The nonbinary wiki

But,

Androgyny possession of both masculine and feminine characteristics. Androgyny may be expressed with regard to biological sex, gender identity, or gender expression.

Wikipedia

It is explained well in this post, but I think a good way to understand the difference is that androgyne is an androgynous gender identity. While androgyne will be used as a gender identity, and androgyny is more general reference to a blend of male and female characteristics.

What is overall the most important to understand that use of these words for individuals will vary. General use of these terms has changed over time. If an individual feels that these words help them to understand themselves (even if they don't fit the "exact definitions") then that is what is important. Words are here to benefit us.

Here is a useful graphic to understand the "androgyne spectrum":

androgyne spectrum

[ID: a scale, starting from the left with "Female" and "Feminine", then "Gynx", "Androgyne" and "Androgynous", "Androx", "Male" and "Masculine". End]

from this post, by @bentonthegay. And this post gives a good explanation about it, and about androgyne as a gender identity:

I think that the specific thing that makes Androgyne an identity all its own that I believe is within the center of the gender spectrum, right alongside other non-binary genders that blur the line between “male” and “female”. Androgyne is the “neither” and/or “both” of the spectrum. It’s a bit of a blend of selected traits from both sides. Given, that means very different things to different people, so I imagine that not every Androgyne person dresses or behaves just like I do. [...] The part of the identity that sets it apart is how Androgyne people feel about themselves.  As an Androgyne person, I believe that I am not a man or a woman. I reside comfortably between the extremes. So I guess it’s not just a mix, it’s more that I’m a blurred segment of the gradient between them. I do believe that Androgyne is an identity by itself and not just “a mix of female and male traits”. Given, that’s like saying a banana split is just ice cream with bananas and sweet toppings. You’re not wrong, but it’s not just that.

post by @androgynepositivity

Another important point to remember that while androgyne is a mix of the two binary genders, it is also connected to neutrality, being in the middle of the spectrum, it is "both" and "neither", and can be different for each person.

Similarly, androgyny can be both presenting femininely and masculinely at the same time, or more of a neutral look, neither feminine nor masculine.

multigender?

Depending on the person, androgynes may see themselves as falling under the multigender umbrella.

in the "Brochure for the Human Outreach and Achievement Institute" (1987) the following definition is found:

Androgyne: A person who can comfortably express either alternative gender role in a variety of socially acceptable environments. (Includes bigenderist)

Source

This is both an interesting historical look on the meaning of androgyne, but also the close connection androgyne has with the multigender (and in particular bigender) community.

The meaning of bigender has expanded in the past 30+ years. It refers to people who have two specific gender identities, these identities may be male and female but also may not be. Seemingly this can include androgynes.

The choice to include oneself under the multigender/bigender umbrella should be a personnel one. Do I feel like being androgyne is a mix of two things? Or perhaps it is one identity, one gender? Maybe the experiences of multigendered people resonate with me, and I would like to be connected to their community regardless? The history connects androgynes and multigended people. At any rate, we are all queer and therefore connected.

micro-labels

Femandrogyne: an androgyne person that feels more feminine than masculine.

Mascandrogyne: an androgyne that feels more masculine than feminine.

Neutrandrogyne: an androgyne with equal amounts of masculinity and femininity, and/or simply neutral.

Versandrogyne: an androgyne with amounts of femininity and masculinity that fluctuate, for example they could go between femandrogyne and mascandrogyne.

Demiandrogyne: an androgyne who relates partially, but not fully, to the androgyne experience (this term is also under the demigender umbrella).

Thank to @androgyne-culture-is in this post for the deffintions, they can also be found in the LGBTQIA+ Wiki.

flags and symbols

The official androgyne pride flag is:

[ID: flag with three vertical stripes, in the colors, from left to right: pink, purple, and light blue. End]

The pink represents femininity, the light blue masculinity, and the purple a mix of them both.

This is a great post explaining about other flags that are less known, based off the nonbinary wiki.

One important symbol is:

[ID: a circle with an arrow coming out of the top, and a horizontal line underneath the triangle of the arrow. End]

This symbol is a mix of female (Venus) and male (Mars) symbols. It is also an intersex symbol, and a symbol for other genders. In the image the symbol is pointing up, but it is sometimes depicted pointing to other directions.

Another important symbol is the Necker Cube:

[ID: illustration of a cube. End]

Necker Cube n. 1. An optical illusion in the shape of a cube. May take either of two forms:

Proposed by the author as a symbol of androgyny, because it is either concave or convex depending on how you look at it. I prefer this to the mars-plus-venus sign, which depends upon a juxtaposition of stereotpyes (sword and shield for male, looking-glass for female), and which, furthermore, combines the signs for the two most irritating gods in the Roman pantheon. If we must depend on Greek mythology, I would prefer to take a cue from Janus and use some variation of the two-faces motif on the cover of some editions of The Left Hand of Darkness. The Necker cube, however, is simpler, and suggests ambiguity in more than mere gender. Who wants to design the lapel pin?

 The Angel’s Dictionary, part of the Androgyny RAQ

And for more info: Practical Androgyny

There is much more history to the word and identity. Many more experiences it could include, but there is only so much I can cover. I do hope that nothing I've written makes it seem like this identity has rigid rules that need to be adhered to in order to identify with it. On the contrary. This seems to be a very broad and open way of identifying, and different aspects of it may resonate with many.

[elysia-nsimp]

OC introduction: Buggie (Twisted Wonderland)

Basics

Orville Becket, more known as just Buggie (he/they/it/bug/bugself) is an Octavinelle student based on Oogie Boogie from Nightmare Before Christmas. It is the Motherfucker Ever. Also it’s somewhere on both the ace and aro spectrums, but still enjoys romantic relationships. They have described their gender as “mmmm bugs👍”

(Author’s note: I’m still very much learning about noun pronouns! I’m going to use the first three sets of pronouns for this intro for now.)

Buggie is… sure something from the Nightmare Realm. He just calls himself a nightmare creature and leaves it at that. No one knows exactly how old Buggie is, but… I mean, they’re a second year. He fuckimg hates all things school but is scarily good with potions.

Buggie’s maybe 5’9, little on the bigger side, but weighs like nothing? Pick it up and it will bite you. Anyway, Buggie doesn’t really do clubs, but does run a very legal gambling ring somewhere under NRC (and is the undefeated champion for completely legit reasons).

Hobbies, Talents, Preferences

Buggie enjoys cooking! They’re actually very good at making drinks, both alcoholic and non-alcoholic. Makes yummy stew (don’t ask what’s in it). A lot of students are hesitant to eat whatever Buggie makes, but it’s probably one of the most competent cooks at NRC, up there with Jamil.

As expected, based on their name, Buggie also likes to take care of bugs. You will always find bugs on them or in their clothes… they have named every single one and remember each and every one of their names. They can also always tell each bug apart, no matter how similar they look. They can also communicate with these bugs as if they were people too. It’s kind of scary.

Buggie ALSO knows a little too much about nightmares. If you fall asleep near him, you WILL have very vivid and awful nightmares. Buggie cannot control this but will not apologize if he doesn’t consider you a friend.

He enjoys bugs, mostly. That and card/dice games. Challenge him to a game, I dare you. He’s unbeaten. His favourite snack is snake stew—no spiders tho. Least favourite food is any kind of salad. Bro won’t eat veggies if you force it down their throat. They also do NOT like it if you hurt their bugs… like… has a PHYSICAL reaction if you step on one. Do not the bugs.

Backstory

Buggie, being a creature from the Nightmare Realm, grew up with a VERY different set of rules than us. Even despite the difference in rules, I think we can all agree that Buggie’s parents SUCKED.

Buggie didn’t get SHIT growing up. No birthday celebrations, no “good job”s when it did good in school… nothin. It grew bitter from the neglect and ran away about a year before appearing at NRC. It wasn’t invited, but it’s here now. No one knows where exactly it came from or how it found itself here, but no one can get it to leave so it’s a student now.

He will not accept any gifts you try to give him. He doesn’t understand the concept of giving gifts to others… he lives off of a “take what you need to survive” mentality.

Unique Magic

Any time anyone asks about their unique magic, Buggie just laughs and responds with “wouldn’t you like to know, weather boy?”

Anyway. Incantation.

“Roll the dice,

Don’t think twice,

And pay the price;

Snake Eyes!”

You may hear it mutter this incantation under its breath during gambles.

Relationships

Azul Ashengrotto

Azul HATES Buggie… it never wears its uniform right and every time he points it out, Buggie changes something so it’s even worse. Buggie just finds it funny though.

Jade Leech

Look, usually Buggie is the one making others scared, but Jade scares Buggie. Actually, there’s an AU where they get over their differences and become extremely close, but… yeah not generally the case.

Jamil Viper

Oh. Oh Jamil hates Buggie. Buggie just LOOOOVES dropping beetles down Jamil’s shirt. Jamil avoids Buggie like the plague.

Literally all the professors

No one can tame Buggie. Teachers hate them.

Other Works

Playlist 😈

Media

^ made by my buddy Howl lol

[cy-cyborg]

So I sent you an ask before your tumblr got deleted and I’m assuming the ask got deleted too. Basically, when I was watching Nimona I thought Ballistar got his prosthetic too quickly after his amputation. But I don’t actually know how long it takes for an amputation to heal, or to build up the strength needed to use a prosthetic. Also I would have liked to see him learn to use his prosthetic instead of using it perfectly from the beginning. But I’m not an amputee. Are my impressions of this accurate?

Yeah, I'm really sorry about that (also that it took me a little while to answer this time too!), I'm pretty sure my answer was actually the next post in my queue 😅.

So I haven't seen Nimona (I really want to, but I don't currently have Netflix lol) so I can only answer generally, but the healing time is different depending on what you mean by healed. If you mean just the wound healing, that takes a few weeks, usually 2-4 weeks. If you mean able to wear a prosthetic, for leg amps, that's usually 6-8 weeks, but I think it might be shorter for arm amputees since they aren't weight bearing through their stumps. Im not 100% sure, though. To fully heal (the swelling in the stump goes down, general pain settles, etc) can take a year or more, but most people will be back to their normal lives long before that, though. As for building up strength to use the prosthetic, that's really variable. Some people take to their prosthetics REALLY quickly, others take a while. The type of amputation is a big factor, but lots of other little things go into it too. Ballistar is an above-elbow amputee right? As I understand it, those kinds of prosthetics are quite difficult to use, both due to the strength needed and due to them not being super intuitive.

In saying all this though, unless its a focal point of the story or its a very grounded/realistic setting, I'm personally pretty lenient with most sci-fi/fantasy in this regards. We definatly need more media - even fantasy and sci-fi that shows that side of being an amputee or at least puts in effort to acknowledge it, but I think stories that lean a bit more into the fantasy side of things have their place too, especially in stories like Nimona where the focus seems to be elsewhere. This isn't to say you shouldn't try to include the realistic rep where you can, but you have to find a balance between realism and the tone your story has. Some stories really would benefit from the more grounded/realistic depictions that show everything, others might only need a brief mention. It depends on the story, and it's really hard to say where Nimona lies on that spectrum without having actually seen it, but from the little I have seen, I feel like it falls on the "brief mention" side of things since it already has so much going on.

I'm going to use How to Train Your Dragon as an example of what I'm trying to say, just becuase I know the first movie got a lot of critisism from amputees for having hiccup literally get up and start walking the moment he woke up after loosing his leg, but I think it lands in a similar area of the spectrum I'm talking about. HTTYD is one of those movies where having the more realistic approach wouldn't have really fit with the tone or pacing, but it would have benifited from a little more than what we got. Not much though, since we kind of already got it with toothless anyway. In my opinion, all it needed was a slight tweak to that ending scene and it would have been perfect (in my opinion). Personally, I would have made Hiccup (without a prosthetic) sit on toothless's back when they went out the door for the first time. The scene plays out almost exactly the same, and you get the symbolic framing the directors wanted, while acknowledging that walking so soon after a burn amputation is not going to happen. Gobber gives Hiccup the tail, saddle and his new leg in the bundle, which allows them to keep the "That bit's my handiwork, with a little hiccup flair thrown in. Think it'll do?" line. Hiccup can instead hold the leg in his hand and say "I might make a few adjustments" - everyone laughs and then it cuts to the end scene with them all flying with the implication some time has passed the same as in the real film. It's a small tweak, but I do think that's all it really needed.

So yeah, While its great to have more realistic representation in your stories, you got to work within the tone your story has. There's no "one size fits all" way to approach it. Again though, I could be wrong about where Nimona would fall here, I know it does tackle heavy subjects in regards to trans representation and discrimination, so maybe it could have made it work. I'll probably talk more about it once I actually see the movie though!

[raayllum]

So I say quite often that TDP is a deeply thematic series, but what does that mean, exactly?

So let’s talk about it

How TDP Constructs Itself From Theme

First off, what is theme? Theme is the question/idea (often times a message) that an artistic artwork (literature / visual media outside of literal art) chooses to explore or posit for. Sometimes this can be very obvious, like the core themes of Family and Faith in the Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, chronicling the adventures of four siblings as they undergo a Christ allegory with the lion, Aslan. Other times, works can feature many different over arching themes, such as ATLA’s examination of war, cultural grief, destiny, family, and the importance of balance, etc etc. 

Sometimes (and I’m sure I have too) theme and narrative can be used interchangeably, even if they are different things. So what’s the difference between Theme and Narrative? A Narrative is how a story fits over its themes, almost like the bricks over scaffolding for a house. For example, Hadestown takes the narrative of Orpheus and Eurydice and employs a cyclical structure in order to explore themes of futility vs hope woven in with the cycle of the seasons from its secondary mythic structure in Hades and Persephone. 

Thus, TDP is a Narrative ultimately about Breaking Cycle(s) and then explores that thematically through just about every character and dynamic in the show, with only very tiny side character exceptions (occasionally, and even then, it’s very minimal). What role does Power (Viren) have to play, or Sacrifice (Rayla)? How do we ensure we’re breaking the Cycle in the right way (Soren), that we’re striving for true Justice (Ezran)? What can we justify for the sake of our families (Claudia, Harrow) and can we not (Karim)? 

This is also why, while every character is important, particularly into the trio, if I had to pick just one character that is undeniably the Main Character of the Show™ it’s Callum, because Freedom from the Cycle is the most important theme of the show with everything else operating along the spectrum or axis of “total freedom” to “no freedom”. Breaking the Cycle - breaking the Chain - is freedom, and requires having agency to make those choices, whether it is gifted or grabbed desperately with both hands, or even accidental. It’s also why Aaravos, a villain of the Stars and Destiny, is our main villain for the series itself. It’s also why little mister Freedom Boy is our central mage figure, rather than a warrior or having Freedom given to another one of the kids, because the hinge on which the Cycle spins has always been magic (normally Dark, but not always) and thus Callum being a human connecting to a primal source is the Great Undoing of the wheel. 

But why write so thematically, and why do I think TDP primarily writes from theme (as opposed to character or anything else) when it came to constructing itself as a series, especially when characters are typically the main draw of a show and certainly of this one in so many ways? Well

Fantasy is Inherently Thematic

In contemporary / realistic fiction novels, you have to contend with real lived history. That either means writing historical divergence fiction and acknowledging the divergence (as much as you can, although ramifications can be hard to fathom never mind explore realistically), or being revisionist, or picking and choosing your setting very carefully. There is so much you have to contend with, and it can be noticeable if you don’t. If a character feels like they can only go to school in USA or Canada and not another country, a reader from another country will likely notice. 

All of this to say is that Fantasy (and sci fi) in general lets you strip away all the extra crap and, in the case of crafting a secondary world, lets you include literally only what needs to be included, removing that “what about everyone else globally” schtick when a magical crisis is happening in one part of a world that has a global network to begin with. In the case of TDP, this means crafting just one continent, literally splitting it in two, and not having to contend with any other sort of continent. This would not work in a realistic fiction novel because our world isn’t constructed that way, but a second fantasy world actually can, because all that matters is what the story needs.

Which was nice to get confirmation on regarding the team’s worldbuilding process in the latest Q&A answers: 

The characters and their journey dictated what worldbuilding details we needed to focus on up front: If Callum and Ezran are from a human kingdom called Katolis, what is Katolis like? If Rayla is an elf, what does that mean? Are there multiple kinds of elves? What kind is Rayla?  What does it mean that she’s an assassin? The dragon egg will hatch a very powerful dragon—what kind, and what does that mean for the dragon’s parents/lineage? We filled in what needed filling, but left a great deal of Xadia open-ended. In fact, none of the other human kingdoms had names until Season 2, when the direction of the story (specifically, Viren’s interaction with the Pentarchy) demanded that we give them more attention and thought. This has helped us avoid writing ourselves into too many corners by laying out too many “rules” for the universe in advance.

Rayla can have a Scottish accent without being wholly and culturally Scottish. Ezran and Harrow can exist in a world as Black royalty without racism. What this means, then, is that characters are grounded in their symbolic and thematic underpinnings. 

So let’s talk about it!

Consistent Symbolism

I could’ve sworn I’ve talked about it before for writing advice in general but I can’t find it now, but one of the easiest ways to make fantasy characters that are also thematic are to given them a symbolic cornerstone / underpinning. Think Katara from ATLA being the overflowing nurturer and icy rage of the sea; Aang, gentle and torrential power of the air; Aaravos, mysterious and playing the long game like the stars.

This is best seen perhaps through Callum, Janai, and Rayla - and TDP definitely leans into it harder for arcanum-connected characters, for sure, where their magic reflects their personalities and themes. We’ve already talked about Callum with his wings and his breath/mouth motif, so we can move on there. 

Terry is steady, patient, and growth oriented, just like the earth. Aaravos is cruel and therefore literally heartless. The Moon changes faces and hides itself, rarely revealing its full / true nature, yet is also light in the darkness, just like Rayla.

Janai is illuminative and compassionate, bright and a strong leader, eventually surefooted in the steps she’s taking to lead her people. But like her primal, she can blinded to the truth (such as how far her brother has fallen). 

This is also why so much in the series is circular. A decent amount of the symbols of primal sources, Harrow’s crown being a literal broken circle, the chains of history / handcuffs, Rayla’s moon opal pendant, the mirror, Rayla’s binding, Callum’s primal stone, Zym’s egg, the Cycle itself, with the angular cube as one of the few exceptions. Callum and Ezran themselves being the literally uneven towers of Katolis; Claudia’s black-and-white hair symbolism paired with the fact Rayla is a dual wielder. Viren likewise having duality of his normal and corrupted form. The butterflies. Viren’s eye motif, poisoning his own vision to Aaravos weaving a web over one eye to Viren’s eyes being clear when he is resurrected. Rayla’s hand on her heart motion, etc etc. 

It’s why when Soren and Claudia visit their father in prison in S3, Viren is in the light, and they are the ones who are framed like they are behind bars.

Symbols when repeated often enough become motifs. The theme is what dictates both large and small plot points. But to talk about that at length, we have to talk about what TDP loves to do most of all, which is

Irony

There are many different forms of irony. The most well known one is dramatic irony, common in horror films and tragedies, in which the audience knows something the characters do not. TDP does employ this from time to time, such is in early S2 when we know Claudia and Soren are up to no good but the boys don’t, or in early S4 when Ezran says that “This will be the start of a great era of peace,” but we already know Aaravos has put things in motion, culminating in Ibis’ murder and death later that same episode. 

However, TDP also enjoys a broader sense of irony, in which contradictory elements are layered on top of one another and then fused together. 

This is true for both characters - Rayla being sworn to kill the princes then becoming their protector; Soren being sworn to protect the princes and then trying to kill them; each culminating in S3 with falsely killing Viren, the wrong king of Katolis for Rayla, and Soren’s own father - and plot lines, such as Ezran’s abdication plot line in S3 that spans close to a third of the season. 

Harrow says that “A child is freer than a king,” emphasizing the series’ Main Theme of Freedom as well as the importance of youth and looking to the youth to break the cycles dictating their lives. So what does S3 do? It has Ezran remove his metaphorical chain he inherited from his father - the crown - to take on real chains. They turn him into a child king (two layers of irony) and then put the child king jail (three) and upon abdication (four). 

We see this directly in S4, even if we do not have the full context for it, with Viren being turned to stone in the same manner he brought down Avizandum: a king-father felled by dark magic (sound familiar) and ripped away from his child(ren). 

What does this all mean? (Conclusion)

Great, so TDP is written pretty thematically. What does it mean? Well, if you’re like me and you like to analyze or theorize about the series, it’s a pretty good place to start. There’s a lot riding on Book Five: Ocean for Rayla with it in mind, as well as hints that the Key of Aaravos will be revealed that season as well. It can be a useful bedrock for making predictions or seeing where characters may go, based on where they already have (re: my analysis of the show’s light and darkness motif that I thought would be small, and then ended up being quite a big deal in S4, and will presumably continue to be). It’s also one of the reasons TDP feels so cohesive because while things can go in unexpected directions, the thematic graces and symbolism of the series stay completely intact, if not continually reaffirmed.

It’s a story that’s weaving a beautiful tapestry, and it really really shows.

[its-no-biggie]

hmm havent been rvb posting much..... time to talk about simmons and caboose! cause a while ago i saw a post saying that simmons and caboose are on "opposite ends of the autism spectrum", which is SO true and i wanna talk about the different ways theyre each autistic coded.

[apparently i am incapable of writing a reasonable length post, sheesh]

bc like. simmons is what people typically think "mild" autism looks like. textbook "aspergers". theres a reason im using terms that arent used by the autistic community, and its because autistic people arent the ones who make these kinds of distinctions. this is autism as seen by neurotypicals: socially awkward, smart in one area of expertise but talks about it a little too much, annoyingly pedantic at times.... you get the idea. and while these are autistic traits that i can relate to, i feel like caboose is a better representation of what it feels like to actually have autism. like, he has an easier time making friends with robots than people, he never understands whats going on except for the time travel in season 17, where hes the ONLY one who understands it. he doesnt understand figurative language, constantly misses obvious social cues or breaks unwritten rules that everyone should know, and has a very hard time lying, deceiving, or keeping information from people.

and i think the reason caboose is more relatable even though simmons is more "textbook" autistic, is because caboose is written as DISABLED. he has a hard time following simple conversations. he cant understand things that should be obvious. everyone around him is constantly frustrated because "why cant he just DO it??" so even if his symptoms dont line up exactly with autism (especially since the way hes written changes over the course of the show), at the end of the day, autism is a disability. so personally, i relate a lot more with him and his struggles than someone like simmons, who is awkward and "weird", but doesnt really seem to struggle with day to day life.

in short: simmons is what masked autism (especially if you have a useful special interest, like computers) looks like from an outside perspective. a little awkward, talks too much, but smart where it counts. generally "useful", and mostly "normal". but caboose is what it feels like to grow up with autism. always confused, everyone treats you like youre different and you cant really do anything about it, cant seem to get along with anyone even though you just want to be friends, and no matter what you do, you screw up everything you touch.

anyway im not saying that simmons isnt autistic, or that hes "less" autistic (bc that isnt a thing lol). simmons just masks a lot better than caboose. thats what an autistic person pretending to be "normal" acts like (its certainly how i act around other people lmao). but because hes not written by an autistic person, they write him like thats all there is to it. which is kind of unfortunate because it feels like theres a whole other side to him that we never really get to see.

now, the fact that the writers set out to write a nerd and wrote an autism stereotype, and set out to write a dumbass and wrote someone who is clearly disabled..... that is a whole separate conversation that im not gonna get into. especially since i dont really know much about rooster teeth, aside from the fact that the fandom seems to have wholly rejected them, and of course what i can see just from watching the show. but i think its clear that its not exactly good representation.

anyway, i still hc them both as autistic, and if/when i write them, i hope my interpretation reflects that while still being true to the characters. it actually works out great for me that theres one autistic person on each team, because whenever im thinking of dialogue and i have an idea thats a little too autistic (like saying something really blunt or picking up on a pattern most people wouldnt notice) i can usually give it to one of them instead of writing it out entirely. which works out really well for caboose especially, because he tends to be quiet during exposition unless hes addressed (bc he cant follow it). so having him make autism commentary can break up all the "blue team problems" nicely. plus having him innocuously call people out when theyre being ambiguous is WAY funnier than "haha caboose doesnt know whats going on" imho

[dangermousie]

What I like about Iron Family is stylistically it doesn’t feel like a weekender. Like a lot of weekenders feel low budget and when filmed has a noticeably different style to other prime time shows. It’s often more in line with Dailys. But this one feels there is budget. Maybe it’s the cut of episodes.

But yeah I regularly watch Weekenders but only a few I’ve enjoyed with KBS, I liked Five Enough but was only watching for Sunghoon and Shin Hyesun (their chemistry was unreal) and they were a side couple - but I loved how they tackle the challenges of remarriage with two families becoming blended. They had The Real is Come recently and that was the first time watching live I stuck with it but it had its misfires. I do prefer the older ones if I watch. But I fall into two spectrums. The slice of life family side which KBS often do, or the rootable Makjang ones where the first 2-5 episodes deals with childhood versions of the mains, that MBC use to do well. And I hate Makjangs but it’s too unrootable for me, but there are some weekenders where it not as bad.

But the only two I could easily rewatch is Five Enough for Sunghoon/Hyesun. And Never Twice. I don’t know if you heard that one. It was on MBC. Like Iron Family, only 36 episodes. Didn’t have the filming style or budget feel that Iron Familu does. But I loved it, I remember binging it. I liked the found family trope. There was the usual kdrama tropes like murder mystery. As always there’s a rich family. I just remember watching it thinking the most unrealistic thing was a 22 year old Kwak Dongyeon playing a 30 year old.

But I do wonder if the cut will become the new norm for KBS? Because MBC and SBS have stopped doing them for years. And I think ratings are not what they use to be. So shorter runs could trim out the filler. As a lot of weekenders lose direction once the main ship gets together.

Sorry, this post was longer than expected. I’m curious to see how Iron Family turns out as it could set a trend with its different filming style and shorter runs.

No need to be sorry, it was a fun read!

I haven't watched weekenders in YEARS because of the time commitment and just having less time than I used to so I cannot comment on the ones you mentioned or their different look in general - back when I used to watch them more regularly, over a decade ago, they honestly looked about the same as most of the rest of kdramas except for really premium/fancy ones. I think newer kdramas moved to "newer" filming style and these just stayed old fashioned.

I used to like both melo and slice of life weekenders. Some of the melo/makjang ones were SO funnnnn! Still remember when SBS broke Joo Ji Hoon's blackballing and actually hired him as the lead for Five Fingers and this got him his career back.

Honestly, I hope this stays good, because the cast is SO solid but more importantly, that scriptwriter never wrote a drama I didn't love.

[pumpkinstrawbrew]

How do you think Bruce and John's relationship dynamics look from Bruce's side? How did he first realize that he felt something for the Scarecrow? Does he feel remorse for kissing a man who is a criminal? Does he even consider John his boyfriend? And if so, how does he feel at the next gas attack on the city and at the next departure of John to Arkham?

well….

i’ll begin with saying, that bruce is destined to be miserable in my book. always. he cannot have it easy. i love how often he *canonically even* attracted to villains/morally grey people, an’ how it inevitably tends to clash with his hero codex an’ general worldview. that’s a pretty painful existence, really! the amount of ‘self-inflicted’ emotional/mental damage, that some heroes tend to put onto their own shoulders is honestly a wonderment of its own right. 

so naturally, when it comes to matters of the heart, someone like batman just cannot have it in a way, where it would ‘work out’. i feel like bruce’s an' selina’s relationships are a prime example of that. aka how he digs ‘bad’ kind of people, even if he knows that it most likely won’t ever amount to any sort of ‘sweet’, domesticated fantasy, that he might be wishing for. an' the thing with bruce is that he’s not dumb, he gets it. even if at first, he tries to deny it, attemtping to seek ways around it, in the end, he has to deal with the fact, that it is what it is. so i think, that at his core, bruce is always going to be conflicted about his ‘taste’, even if it does make hella lot of sense, takin’ in his history. in short, batman having a preference, that would actively make him cucked even from an ounce of normalincy is precious to me. 

with this in mind, the dynamic that bruce has with crane is a mixed bag, esp bc he can have slightly different relationships with scarecrow, depending on who he is at the moment. batman or billionaire play-boy. an’ depending on who he is dealing with, crane can also be bolder, more vicious, or actually, meeker an’ less aggressive. like, bruce wayne won’t put his scrawny ass in the dirt, bc it would blow his cover. meanwhile, the bat cannot be too forgiving with jonathan, bc he’s a hero, so it’s almost a rare chance to see how he can influence jon from both sides of the spectrum. an’ it also can show him more sides of jonathan too, considering that in most set-ups *including the ones that i have for them* crane is unaware, that batman an’ bruce are the same man lol. also, it would be nice for bruce to finally have a villain, who isn't specifically in love only with the batman aspect of him.

i mean, it’s kinda given that jonathan doesn’t fully bother with ‘unmasking’ the bat, bc he doesn’t really care who he is. it’s still be batman to him. therefore usually, i don’t picture jonathan’s reaction to the reveal of the bat being bruce wayne to be hella emotional *like in plots, where they’re just enemies*. he prob just be like ‘oh, this kinda makes sense, yeah’. everyone else be bitchy about it, bc how can their batman be some playboy, jock dude lol. jon won't be like that, since he doesn't separate the bat from the man beneath the mask. at least, not to the level where he wants them separated or won't stand those both halves existing at the same time. that’s why the scarecrow is the true one. he’s so needy an’ greedy, that he’d be happy to have both sides of a big bad bat. but back to the main point, i feel like bruce kinda always carries a sentiment of ‘i have to stop you bc it’s my job’, but also ‘i want to believe that you can better yourself’. an’ in cases, like crane’s, batman prob also wants it for jon’s own sake too, considering how often he ends up accidentally hurting or damaging himself.

n’ i feel like it would be even more painful an’ disappointing, if jonathan would still keep up his scarecrow act, while they had smth goin’ on. but such is the nature of jon’s emotions. they’re destructive, when negative an’ there is no reason to assume like his love would differ from his obsession. from how he usually perverse things, it's all the same to him. in a way, bruce be ready for that. he must expect jon’s feeling for him to be feverish an’ kinda extreme' no matter, if said feeling is ‘positive’ or not. i also cannot see jonathan *even if he’s not a scarecrow in some timeline* being normal about batman or bruce, bc he has no idea how to be ‘normal’ about anythin’ lol. bruce is more balanced in comparison, but he also has that odd bit, where he is sometimes more sympathetic to his rogues, than he is to their hostages. in crane’s case, it literally happened at least twice. he nearly killed people, but bruce was like ‘it’s awful that this happen to you, but you kinda deserved it tho’, making the victims pretty confused as to why the bat was more understanding toward his rogue straw-goblin, than toward them. an’ i don’t think, that bruce even always realises that he plays favourites an’ how it looks from the side. so i can’t say, that ‘remorse’ is the right word for what he will feel, if he kisses jon an’ makes out with' him, fully knowing that he’s not a good person. it’s more of a….grief, perhaps? disappointment in himself, mourning for all destroyed lives *jon’s included*, but also umbrage, that he cannot control it or make jonathan stop, unless jon will somehow find it in himself to stop. which is almost impossible. but at the same time, no matter how furious the bat is with the scarecrow, i love how bruce *in older media, at least* cannot bring himself to give up on him. 

in general, bruce’s view on crane is an interesting matter. to some extent, he pities him, but he also seems to get angry with him pretty often too. an’ for a good reason, esp since the bat clearly views jon’s intelligence as an admirable thing, but thinks that it’s a true shame how he uses it or for what, rather. this sentiment doesn’t apply only toward crane, of course. a lot of batman's rogues could have done smth good with their talents/knowledge/hacks if they applied it elsewhere. but i feel like on some level, bruce has an easier time ‘relating’ to jonathan, than to some of his other villains. there are dozens of parallels, that they share, but they also have so many things, that make them a great fuel to one another too, both as bruce wayne / jonathan crane an’ as batman / scarecrow. jon is essentially, one of batman’s most twisted reflections. so idk if he will ever like, openly think of crane as his bf, since it almost feels dishonest to call him this. he’s more of ‘the worst half’ an’ bashert in one. but i feel like people would tauntingly, jokingly call scarecrow’s bat’s bf or even gf. bullock surely would have, haha. but like generally, the villains an’ heroes alike tend to be overdramatic about their relationships with one another. their inner monologues are pretty funny bc of that too. like, they’d be in the middle of the fight with said enemy-lover, an’ randomly think of some well-articulated, poetic line, as if they sat their ass down to write it in a personal diary lol. bruce thinking about jon’s ‘awkward grace’ an’ long legs won’t ever be unfunny to me, even if it wasn’t written in a suggestive way.

anyways, i think that all of the above *besides the last part* prob also sums up how i feel batman reacting to jonathan being, well, himself. bruce would expect it. an’ it would sting more, for sure, but i don’t think, that there is any non-nuanced scenario, where batman would for example, just let jon go, bc they’re lovers now. he might be a bit more ‘forgiving’ to scientist aspect of jonathan’s worldview, but it won’t mean, that he’d agree with ‘end justifies the means’ kind of approach, bc he doesn’t want innocent to be harmed / suffer. he also against killing / death, no matter who the target is n’ whatever they ‘deserve’ it or not. they won’t ever see eye to eye on that. but if batman / bruce’s presence in jon’s life will be extended, an’ if he would try to make very little compromises, then maybe, eventually jonathan can be a bit less dangerous for others *an’ himself*. or maybe, he would somehow find a way to make batman ‘worse’. make him join the club, so to speak lol. 

like, when people think about the ‘enemies to lovers’ trope, i’ve noticed, that often one side of the ship does a 180 turn, an’ becomes somewhat okay with whatever they were not okay with beforehand. for me, it’s more of a stalemate of sorts. like each side might make some compromises or close their eyes on smth, but not be at peace with it. if we picture crane as suddenly rehabilitated, it’s won’t change the fact, that most versions of him had killed / mentally tortured people. an’ he might or can potentially do this again, even if ‘for a good reason’ this time.

the love can change a lot of things for them, but at the same time, it won’t change certain things at all. i don’t believe that love / deep feelings can cure jonathan’s mental illness. if anything, it would prob only complicate things. since sure, it might make him a bit more mindful about idk accidentally killing someone, bc it makes the bat upset. he might try to be more cautious, but not bc he suddenly cares about lost lives, but only bc batman does. it might be a bit better, than him not givin' a shit at all, but jonathan still be a sociopath, that only kinda cherishes how that one person views him, an’ it'll be the only reason why he would tone smth down. if bruce be like ‘okay, that’s not what i wanted, but i can try to make it work’. i suppose, it might be considered as jon slightly corrupting him as well. besides, bruce will have to pay a lot of attention to him, to keep jonathan in line. gotta like dom him everyday an’ such, just so that he’d be less vicious lol.

[codylabs]

now presenting in no particular order

Science Fiction stories that have affected my own work very greatly

1. Star Wars

I mean, this is an obvious one. Much of America grew up on these six, because everybody's dad loved them, to the point where meeting somebody who's "never seen star wars" is an oddity, and, well, neither me or my dad are exceptions. They're good movies, with good lore, good plots, strong characters, writing and dialogue that's all across the spectrum, and exceptional action scenes. What's there more to say?

They're very much your "bread and butter" scifi, in the sense that it sets its stories within a world of cool-looking spaceships, quirky robots and wacky aliens, but doesn't examine or elaborate on much of it, but rather treats it all as a given, as a backdrop for the human stories. (Contrast against, say, Star Trek, which makes the scifi concepts themselves its focusing interest.) As a result, there's nothing terribly revolutionary to be found in Star Wars. I can't and won't call it generic, of course, because although it very much is a 'generic scifi world', many of the tropes we associate with 'generic scifi worlds' were codified here, and there's a lot going on behind the scenes, both on the political side, in the extended universe, and in ol' Georgie's brain.

And to call them creatively bankrupt would be a big enough lie to warrant legal repercussions, since there are a LOT of cool scifi ideas here, even if they aren't necessarily the story's focus. Repulsorlifts, Coruscant (I spelled that right first try), Podracing, the Sarlaac pit, Droidekas, the Death Star, cloud city, the VERY sufficient excuses for using swords in scifi, the list goes on.

In terms of how the franchise affected my work, I really couldn't give an estimate. I love space, and spaceships, and space battles, and have them often enough. Many of my stories focus on the human aspects, I seek out excuses for melee fights, I like generic goodguy-y heroes and I like strong personalities, but whether any of that comes from Star Wars or is a part of me, I couldn't say. Maybe there's no difference. I saw them as a youngling, so very long ago.

2. Republic Commando

Now I read these when I wasn't quite so young. These are good books, and they are very much Star Wars disillusioned. This is Star Wars separated from the main cast and the main plot or the black-and-white morality of simple stories. This is a squad of elite child soldiers suffering through the trenches of a war, getting hurt, going rogue, falling in love, shooting people in the head, while the adpoted father who trainedraised them tries to arrange an escape for his boys to a new home far away, until it all comes crashing down when you the reader knew it would but nobody in galaxy did, in Order 66. And then the series keeps going. It should have gone on longer but the Clone Wars TV show changed canon so much that the author quit. But you can tell it's still Star Wars because they mention Kenobi like twice and there is one (1) scene with Darth Vader.

In terms of scifi they're just Star Wars again, speeders and space battles and laser guns and stuff. Stories unconcerned with the concepts and the worldbuilding. But I think it goes a step beyond what the movies did, by abandoning any semblance of big-picture-ness or any of the large-scale plot, and focusing only on bit characters, while the larger story from the movies continues elsewhere. The series is ALL OCs. There is nobody here who would warrant a mention in any of the movies, and nobody here who influences galactic history. They influence each other. They love each other, hate each other. They feel real. The war feels real. And I think that's beautiful.

I think that smallness and ruggedness is what lasted into my work. I've never worldbuild-ed the names or histories of wars into my works, but I've liked writing about career soldiers struggling with peace. I've never made diagrams or specs for the weapons that they use, but I've written about the heat of a shell just ejected from a launcher. I've never written strategies for fleet movements, but I've written about spacers scrambling past a closing pressure door as the air leaks out of their room. And I've written about lesser species caught in the crossfire, I've written about jungles and dirty streets, and much of it ties back to this, I think.

3. Starship Troopers

This may very well be the first 'adult' book I ever read, and you should read it too. It was written in the 50s. It's about people in power armor who get dropped out of a spaceship. It's about a man rising through the ranks, learning the meaning of responsibility and leadership. It's about war, how 2 tons of flying robosuit can't save you but your friends and a timely dropship can. It's about duty, mankind become a warrior race to defend themselves in a savage galaxy. It's about honor and discipline. This story invented the concept of power armor, coined the term 'starship', inspired a dozen franchises. It forces the characters and the reader to think about the nature of war, the necessity of sacrifice and duty, the price of security, the nature of freedom, the shortcomings of democracy.

You should read it. It's peak scifi. It's exciting. It's thought-provoking. It's imaginative. It's incredibly, noxiously fascist. It's so so good. You should read it.

I've always loved power armor and jet packs and alien bugs, my stories have them all, and it's this book's fault. Certainly a lot of my really early work was based on it, but I never outgrew a good bug or a good robosuit.

I have never seen the movies, but there was a 1999 TV show that had the Worst CGI ever, and my brothers and I used to love it. However, no adaptation of this book has ever gotten the power armor right except the 1988 anime.

4. Blame!

Too many millennia ago to count, the automated construction drones stopped listening to orders to stop. The Earth, the moon, every piece of matter in the solar system and who knows how far beyond, have been disassembled, all proceeds going to grow the City. The City is all. The City has no end. The characters do not know the meaning of 'land'. The security system of the godlike internet is spawning exterminator drones to destroy all humans who lack the net terminal gene. Clutish transhumans who thrive in the chaos have made it their duty to render the gene extinct. The only hope of stopping the City's growth and shutting down the security system is to issue the internet an order, which requires a human with the gene. The gene may be extinct. Our main character, an immortal cyborg who has been climbing stares for hundreds of panels and thousands of years, is still searching. He has a really cool gun. His girlfriend is an 8ft tall hacker girl who does not have a cool gun and dies like 5 times. His arch-nemiss has a cool gun too. There are... Monsters.

I didn't read this comic until much later in my life, but the setting and the art and the ultra-high-concept action affected me deeply and greatly. If I could, in my entire life, write a single story even 20% as cool, as wonderfully illustrated, as packed with thought and concepts and sheer unbridled IMAGINATION as this one, I would die of pride. This comic is an endlessly-inspiring emblem of what scifi storytelling can be, an ideal I've been striving for since I first read it. If you ever see a massive maze-like spaceship in my works, any abandoned megastructure, any messily-detailed cyborg torso, any unreasonably-powerful weapon, and most of all any BIG OL' HONKIN GANGLE OF PIPES, (and I guaratee if you follow me you WILL see such things) know that it came from this comic.

5. Flatland

Okay, so this one is the reason I actually started this list. Apparently something in the Book of Bill that just came out was based pretty heavily on it, so now a bunch of people are rediscovering it and referencing it in the year of our Lord 2024. But that led to me rewatching the 2007 film, and realizing some of my work has taken from it pretty heavily.

The idea of the book (and its various adaptations) is that there's this oppressive, closed-minded society of 2-dimensional beings living on flatland. One day a circle comes to visit from spaceland, and shows our square protaganist all the wonders of a higher world beyond the one he can see. At its heart, the story is (A) about the dangers of closed-mindedness against possible higher truths, (B) an exploration into how 2-dimensional creatures would function and how higher-dimensional beings might interact or fail to interact with those of lower dimensionality (C) honestly not really scifi at all but I left it on this list because I've used some of its concepts here and there in my universe, and I find it all so very fascinating. If you see any of my characters navigating a 5-dimensional hyperspace or see any creatures evolved to inhabit the surface of a neutron star, know that the unlikely father of such ideas was this story from 1884.

6. Metroid

Well duh. Many of my followers probably know me as The Metroid Guy. Heck I know me as the Metroid guy.

I am the Metroid guy.

Metroid is about this lady in a suit of tank armor wandering around on lonely alien planets filled with monsters. She's a genetically-altered cyborg who was raised by an ancient society of aliens. The environments in Metroid are sometimes harsh, sometimes serene, sometimes ugly, sometimes beautiful, sometimes all at once. The music is captivating. In the first-person games you can see the rain making drips on your visor. When you stop moving she rests her hand on her gun as if relaxing. Nothing in the scary universe scares her, thus, neither does it scare you the player. The games do an excellent job of immersing the players in a faraway land.

I adore this series not for the scifi concepts (as many of them are either half-thought-out nonsense, made purely to look pretty, or derived straight from whatever videogamey gimmick the developers thought would be easy to implement) but for the feelings of confidence, wonder, exploration, and lonely peace. I have several future projects inspired by these parts of Metroid, and they are very dear to me.

In my studied opinion, if Samus was the protaganist of Blame, we would see a marked increase in the number of audience members dying from Peak Fiction.

7. Alien

Long-headed monkey made of pipes is having a Grand Olde Time on this rusty spaceship, what an insane concept 10/10 I wish I was made of pipes.

My dad told me the plot of this movie when i was like 8 and traumatized me, as he should. If in my stories you ever see any rusty spaceships, folks made of pipes, or involuntary pregnancies in the wrong part of the torso, blame my dad.

[steelycunt]

are there any specific writers/works that inspire your way of writing?? (this is me asking for book recomendations 🫣)

hi !! i cant speak much 4 my own way of writing i think it would b far 2 generous to say i write like any of these authors lol but in terms of styles of writing i absolutely have some favourites!! james baldwin + toni morrison's writing styles are probably my favourites ive ever read for very similar reasons they are both incredibly sharp and a bit brutal but also so elegant and alive and vivid i do not think ive ever read an author who captures the human experience quite like they do it is incredible...ive only read sula by morrison but for baldwin my top recommendations would be another country, giovanni's room and if beale street could talk!!

as for others i think douglas stuart (young mungo, shuggie bain, the englishman) and claire keegan (small things like these, foster) both have gorgeous writing styles, stuart particularly for the way he writes people and the love between them and all the difference shapes this can take, and also for the way he writes settings not as just backdrops but as something that forms the people living in them n is brought to life by them, the way that even finds its way into the similes and metaphors he uses which makes his writing feel so immersive and his characters and their love feel so real!! keegan i love for her understated and quite quiet style of writing. both the novellas ive read by her have been very short and slow (neither over 150 pages i think?) and neither with a particularly involved plot, but the feeling and the attention given to such small ordinary depictions of life is so wonderful and something i am very partial to : ^ )

last two i would say (who also go quite well together) are donna tartt (the secret history, the goldfinch) and elena ferrante (my brilliant friend and the neapolitan quartet)!! at the other end of the spectrum from keegan perhaps lol but the sort of. maximalist-feeling detail and the expansive settings and casts in tartt and ferrante's writing are soo wonderful and rich and feel a bit like eating a massive feast full of lots of heavy but delicious dishes and people keep coming out and putting down more. the goldfinch by tartt comes 2 mind particularly when thinking about what i love about this kind of writing, she builds all these different settings and bands of side characters and all of them feel so vivid and fleshed out and bursting at the seams even when they're kind of desolate. and ferrante in the neapolitan quartet does this especially with characters, of which there are so many 2 keep track of that each book has pages at the front listing and explaining them all (but it is definitely worth it).

i think that is all the ones that come to mind in regards to their writing style!! looking at them they go quite well together in their pairs lol. i know ive definitely talked about all of them on here before but hopefully this was helpful still and you might find something new!! thanks for the ask : ^ )

[okeydrama]

every drama i’ve seen so far pt.4

my roommate is a gumiho

3/5

i love her

the chemistry between her and both male leads was so good

the main romance was so well organized and we had so many domestic scenes which i loved

the fantasy element was not as flushed out as i would like

there were a few things that seemed convenient/rushed/nonsensical

those things didn’t take away from my enjoyment though

i loved how lighthearted it was

the second lead was acted really well and i found myself liking the two of them together because of the angst he brought (the way he watched her 😩)

this was actually funny at times

i like how goofy it was

the secondary couple was really good because they brought a rare romantic dynamic

the way scenery/settings were shot well and it was generally aesthetically pleasing

i think this was solid overall but also not very memorable so not an all time favorite but extremely good and worth the watch

descendants of the sun

3/5

the male lead is hilarious

the bromance was hilarious

this was the first drama of this kind that i have watched

the plot was well developed

i liked how much of a subplot the romance was

the secondary couple once again was enjoyable to watch

i think there was too much drama for me and it was slow at times

i might have watched it too quickly because it wasn’t very memorable once again

squid game

4/5

omg i got the hype

i have a lot of complaints but overall it is closer to good than bad for me

first and foremost the unique settings and costuming makes this drama so memorable and vivid and have its own impact

the characters were well flushed out and i believed their motivations/actions/turmoil

introduced me to hoyeon <3

the casting was 10/10

i loved that we got different challenges every episode

the deaths all had an impact

things i didn’t like was the cheap ‘plot twist’

i also didn’t think this plot was particularly unique in concept but very unique and interesting in execution

the cop and his antics were not satisfying at the end which bothered me

the end in general bothered me

hometown cha cha

3/5

this couple was so god damn cute

this story was almost perfect

the almost is because of how annoying the last two episodes were

i don’t like when the couple goes through a third act conflict for absolutely no reason

once they get together it was boring af for two episodes of unnecessary drama

the townspeople were so cute and didn’t detract from the story for me

i love the small town vibes

there was no need for the secondary lead in terms of the romance but i do like the jealousy he pulled out of the male lead

once again cute but not too memorable (i’m not completely a fan of slice of life)

all of us are dead

5/5

omg omg omg

served what it needed to

this was beautifully executed start to finish

was on the edge of my seat and engaged the entire time

the settings, characters, plot all worked

the side romances were still dynamic and engaging which i loved

the betrayals and twists and characterizations were excellent

talented team all around and a great drama

extraordinary attorney woo

4/5

i loved this lollll

the different case per episode format was great

the cartoons that came in randomly were so cute and fun

i think it is a pretty good interpretation of an autistic person but i‘m not on the spectrum so i can’t really say

the romance was so cute and there was just enough in the drama

i loved the side characters like a lot

the friendships were just as important as the romance which i loved

the dad was so cute

the star removed are because of a few issues i had with the pacing and the random things said that i’m going to blame on cultural differences/mistranslation

user not found (web drama)

4/5

this was such a random watch and my first web drama

this was cute overall and it did what it needed to which was entertain me

it took a while to get used to the format and acting and stuff but i think it is typical of a web drama so it didn’t bother me

the friendship between the female lead and the other girl with her same name was so cute and fresh

the romances were basic but i still liked them lol

i was interested from start to finish so that was great

that’s the update! i’ll take recommendations in the comments if you have any

[johnpallo]

This is going to be a bit of a rant.

There's a lot of friction in the current Discourse(tm) between two sorts of media enjoyers: The people who want media that's more comfortable, and the people who see virtue in media that upsets and challenges. I'm generalizing for the sake of this post, but I do think it more or less summarizes the arguments I've seen on both sides.

Part of what bothers me about taking one of these sides or the other is that it assumes a kind of false dichotomy. A piece of media is either family friendly, for kids, comfortable, twee, or whatever other label you want to apply to say it's generally not upsetting to the experiencer; or the work is gritty, "realistic," honest, raw, uncomfortable, challenging, etc.

To me, this kind of dichotomy is unhelpful, and leads to arguments that actually stifle creativity rather than promote it. Most recently I saw a tweet of a gamedev who said she liked Disco Elysium's branching story mechanics, but wasn't a fan of it being a gritty detective story. She then suggested what if you took those mechanics and applied them to a lighter setting, like a witch in a small town solving a low-stakes mystery. From responses I saw on this site, people seemed to HATE the idea that someone could want a story with the narrative depth and choice of Disco Elysium without the same complicated subject matter as DE. One comment said "Imagine if Disco Elysium was about nothing."

I find this idea, that a story with low stakes is "about nothing," to be really annoying. Low stakes stories can in many ways be far more human, able to focus deeply on characters and who they are and how they grow. One of my favorite movies is From Up On Poppy Hill, all in all a pretty low stakes romance story, but I love it for the ways it's able to explore its characters and their choices. I also love Princess Mononoke, a story with MUCH higher stakes that deals with man versus nature and cycles of violence. Each film is good at different things, and I wouldn't want either one to try to be the other.

On the other end of the spectrum, saying that works are "better" with low stakes and less uncomfortable content is also a bad take. This leads to things like people saying there should never be a sex scene in a story because it doesn't "contribute to the plot." Sex, drugs, violence, and all sorts of other potentially uncomfortable topics can be filler, sure, but they can also be powerful tools to explore important topics. But I'm kinda preaching to the choir for most of the people on this site with this point.

On the other side, lighter fair can still be just as important. Heartstopper is a show I've often seen criticized for being too twee, too naive or optimistic in its portrayal of queer experiences, but even this show manages to deal with topics like homophobia, difficult family relationships for queer kids, and eating disorders. Just because a work's over all tone leans towards light and inoffensive, or even outright slice-of-life, doesn't mean there isn't meaningful storytelling happening.

I don't have a strong conclusion to this rant, but I hope that one day people stop with the perpetuation of this strange false dichotomy that a work is either low-stakes, soft, and story-less, or else a story has to be gritty, dark, and meaningful. Escapist media can still make you think. Low-stakes are not the same thing are no story. Explorations of joy can be just as important to us as explorations of pain or loss. Some of the most meaningful stories are about ordinary people, living and changing beside one another.

[cup0fcocoa]

I can't sleep so I'm about to make it everyone else's problem. Get ready for JD ranting

Okay I have a LOT to ramble about but I'll get miscellaneous things out of the way ig

1) in the Danceverse the gloves serve a purpose outside of coaching: they provide a humanoid disguise for the dancers to dance in. Sara, being human, is the only one capable of taking off her glove and not changing at all, but for any other relevant dancer this will not be the case. There's different levels of how odd the Danceverse citizens can get- standard level which is just an every day person (who is usually not a coach), a middle spectrum where a dancer has access to powers but no altered form, and those with altered 'true' forms. The glove and its magic were first introduced by the Traveler and Si'ha Nova as a way to maintain consistently between prominent dancers or anyone who just felt like being humanoid. However, the glove's power got to the wrong hands, and soon one certain sorceress would manipulate this gift for her own selfish desires.

The glove by itself still has side effects though, such as the transformation from true form to humanoid form being unavoidable and (usually) painful- especially if a dancer were to be something like a ghost, doll, or being with a drastically irregular body shape. Ghosts would have to relive their death every time the glove is removed, dolls would lose their sense of humanity, etc etc; to make matters worse, not everyone has free will over their glove use- it's all dependent on what supernatural being a dancer is and the circumstances of their situation.

2) general relations in my mind are scattered and usually organized by group. It'd be a lot easier and faster to understand if I just made a chart tbh but for the most part with one exception the groups I have get along well

3) there's no set timeline for me yet but I've already worked out several plot points with a gist of how things will go. Due to Wanderlust's ability to both open/use portals and open windows into the past and future, it's very easy to integrate arcs dancers from old games go through as something that occurred before the plot of JD23. I can make the entire elemental war canon as well as a way to isekai my favorite dancer to meet my second favorite dancer and have them interact I am a Genius

4) Night Swan deserves to be way more powerful. Not enough people remember she was able to best Wanderlust- the son of what we all know is the king/god of the Danceverse- even if briefly. She has the power to open gates to other realms (something we only see Wanderlust and Traveler capable of previously) and brainwash/mind control dancers with one fell swoop. The minionization process should definitely be a lot longer and WAY more painful, especially since victims literally turn into mindless bird soldiers- which leads me to my next point. In order for Wanderlust to fall prey to her power, Night Swan must've used a lot of magic on him, so much so that I believe it only makes sense if his capture had more severe aftereffects. The way I personally represent this is through his flares- his soul was tarnished by her black magic, causing him to occasionally spasm and basically relive the pain of losing body autonomy. These flares hurt him and anyone who approaches him, putting them in danger as well. He can't be cured, so Jack Rose has to stand back and watch his savior suffer at his hand knowing he can never reverse the damage.

5) speaking of, Jack Rose has siblings, two of them to be exact. While I could say who they are that's just no fun. I do have a drawing of a younger picture of the trio planned out though hopefully. Growing up isolated in the Swan tower was horrid, and both siblings left prematurely: one was kicked out and practically disowned while the other ran away never to be seen again. Jack's boa cape and brooch are hand me downs from them, given as gifts not long before each sibling left his life. Now that he himself has fled the tower and has a deity boyfriend capable of teleporting whenever he pleases, Jack plans on finding and reuniting with them again

6) on the continued topic of siblings, Pulse and Haze are also related (Pulse being older). This is honestly self indulgence but also Haze has the most moves similar to the extreme routine for Boy With Luv so honestly the game does my job for me

7) you know how Sara can travel from the human world to the Danceverse? Yeah the same can happen vice versa. The human world is a destination of great interest to a lot of the dancers, especially those who wish to live out lives as normal people instead of being worried over whether their glove is on right. If a dancer were to successfully cross the border however, Traveler would immediately sense it and send someone to retrieve the dancer (sometimes even escort them back himself). See, Traveler doesn't fancy the idea of invading another dimension for selfish reasons, which is the only reason he allows the rest of the fruity five to occasionally join Sara and find scattered dancers who have gone under the radar in the human world. Anyway, traveling to the human world gives a dancer a glow down and skin tone, basically the inverse of entering the Danceverse

If you're still here congratulations but also if you wanna hear more (which. I'm so sorry if you do) or just want me to draw someone feel free to send an ask. I definitely won't get to it immediately but I will try lol

[limelocked]

gayboy story from my head:

random modern dude has a sister who was really into this one manhwa but eventually lost interest, she got him into it so they could talk about a shared interest but after she dropped off because it was a little too political and the romance was too slow/badly paced he soldiered on and actually really enjoyed it both for the slow romance and a lot for the political science with his favourite character being the stalwart Duke who he identifies with a lot (both not seemingly being interested in romance, instead helping set up the couples and being a generally neutral powerhouse in the politics)

for some reason he falls into the story and possesses one of the primary male leads; one of the royal children, a Prince conceived by the late empress who is fated to have a Rough upbringing where his step-mother the empress consort does everything in her power to get Her Kid on the throne, something that eventually and inevitably leads to the Prince being the only royal kid thats known to be left alive with the numbers of missing and dead being unknown as bodies werent confirmed

upon killing the last of his half siblings, the empress consorts favourite, in self defence he gets back his memories of being Modern Guy and takes it not as being his past life memories exactly but being a revelation from some kinda fucking god (a really boring god) and commits to writing down everything he remembers

cut to the dukes pov later on, theres rumours that the crown prince went mad after killing all his siblings (a rumour thats purposefully incorrect and spread by his detractors, the rumour however being a canon event to the manhwa as the original prince Did have a breakdown) and some think that another noble family needs to step up and thus a faction war is breaking out

the duke is in charge of a very VERY profitable piece of land (trading and bread basket) and could theoretically become independent if not for the political backlash effecting the trade side of things, this is why a lot of nobles come to him and go heeeeeey could you be like the shadow king in the future? the prince is mad and the emperor is on his sickbed with the empress consort having no right to rule (not empress, just consort, no royal blood) so liiiike~

and thats how they meet, the duke going to have an audience with the crown prince to like test the waters, check if the rumours are true, not thinking treasonous thoughts but needing to know how bad things are if the nobles are being This open about treason

back to prince pov as the prince and duke totally are working together and arent having intense mind battles over what the others intentions are until they at least Become Friends and the prince tells the duke about the revelation he got when he was young and the duke goes wow thats wild as fuck and also tracks

after that its will they wont they shounen ai while also doing extreme political scheming, at some point the original plot starts and the prince meets the female lead who is acting Different from what he knows which is because shes actually Modern Guys sister which confuses things a Whole lot for the prince whos been essentially worshipping his past life as a god, female lead and prince spending a lot of time together leading the duke to becoming jealous...

i have a lot of thoughts about this

the question should come up a lot with both the duke and the prince about their relationship and if its gay, if its romantic, what it is, and it should all come back with the answer "it is what it is" and that it doesnt need a label because im thinking the prince is somewhere on the aro spectrum if not both of them, them coming to the conclusion that if they're possessive over each other and want to spend a majority of their time together then thats good enough (but also what are we to do about the subject of heirs to both our families when neither of us can carry child)