#jay gatsby isn't a hero

[fshoulders]

Thought I didn't have anything to add here, but then I pondered. I do have something to add about "what I assume my teachers were trying to teach me with the classics".

I'm not a secondary school English teacher, but I've played one in the past: I used to substitute-teach English at the private high school where I myself matriculated around the time of Jurassic Park. I've taught classes on Great Expectations, Jane Eyre, Henry IV Part...mumble, the Iliad, the Ramayana, Their Eyes Were Watching God (if you didn't get taught that as a classic, go enjoy it now, oh my word).... Lots of stuff. And one time, I taught a class on why we take English class.

It was at the end of my first and longest stint as a substitute, when the head of the English department had broken her arm in twelventy places so I ended up teaching 3 or 4 sections of Junior English for several weeks. We'd started and finished Their Eyes Were Watching God, and moved on to something else, and by then I knew I loved these kids. Which was a shock: when I was their age, I was a misanthropic little paladin and did not like most of my peers. But high school juniors (16-17 years old) are whip-smart, but not yet cocky with it like seniors. They like to have fun, but they're easier to get to quiet down and think seriously than sophomores. However, after those weeks, I felt like even the kids who were best at English class -- who did the reading and raised their hands and weren't afraid to make wild, beautiful connections -- didn't really know why they were there.

So I asked their Regular Teacher if I could take one class period in each class and just do a group discusssion about what English class is for. Because the vibe I was getting off them was 'so I have English grades to use to get into college with'. I had 'em write down their answers anonymously to "What is English Class For?"

They handed their answers in, and I read 'em out. And we talked about their answers, and then we talked about my answers. They had some answers I hadn't thought of. And some of my own answers I didn't have to bring up, because that class already had! A lot of them knew they needed to learn to write well, for instance. We talked about the different kind of things they might want to write besides college essays and eventual job 'deliverables'. (I seem to recall telling them that even if they never wanted to try to write original fiction, that didn't mean cribbing techniques off the 'masters' couldn't make their fanfic better. I know I am a dork, but they laughed!) Some of them talked about a sort of cultural acquisition: getting to know exactly the sort of 'great books' and liberal arts touchstones that were getting beaten up in those screenshots at the top of the thread.

But I think maybe one kid in one of the classes, if that, wrote down the thing I really wanted them to take with 'em out of English class -- English class teaches you how to read more skillfully.

And some of the texts they practice reading on are texts they wouldn't have chosen, which makes them surly. (It sure made me surly in middle and high school.) Some of them are difficult to read. But reading is a skill, like any other. Even if they hadn't wanted to read Jane Eyre, or A River Runs Through It, or Elizabeth Bishop's poetry, or Toni Cade Bambara's short fiction, they could use those texts to improve their facility to read deeply, closely, and well. Then they could apply that facility to any text they wanted to read. For academic ambition, for pleasure or self-improvement or curiosity, or to keep up with a crush. And much of that skill is even transferable, out of the English language, out of the written word! They could read into and under horror movies, political ads, rap lyrics, art films, video games! They could notice and name the biases in the things they read, or read the context around a story the way this whole beautiful thread above did with Huckleberry Finn.

Reading deeply and critically is an underrated skill. We don't talk about it enough, we don't practice it enough, and maybe we don't even know when we're supposed to be learning it. Maybe the screenshotted people had terrible teachers who never made it clear that art isn't endorsement, that we can read against the past but still understand it, or indeed why they were sitting in that classroom at all. If you don't hand the student a scalpel, maybe this is what you get: a reader who stared at each book like the outside of a frog and took nothing away but the fact it reeked of formaldehyde. Maybe it's just a series of bad jokes!

But come, for Muses' sake let us sit upon the ground, and tell mad stories of why we hate Gatsby's guts. (With supporting evidence from the text.) Tell me whether you think the narrator of Wuthering Heights wants you to approve of Kathy and Heathcliff's relationship, and why you think that! Is he manipulating you to feel a certain way? What language feels manipulative, or engages you more with one character's emotions than another's? What do you think Jim thinks of Huck in this chapter, and why do you think that? Which racism do you think is the character's, and which is the author's? How do you tease that out?

English Class: You can bear that book a grudge for the rest of your life, but learning a lot from it today is the best revenge.

[writingquestionsanswered]

Is there any rules or recommendations when choosing a POV in a story? Because I'm working on a story on the pov of a mentor of a 'chosen one' type of character with an arc similar to heros journey. And this mentor would be using this hero to accomplish their goal, and be shady as hall, but still they are my narrator, and protagonist. But it isn't a character with any action or practice involvement, because they are toying with the hero, you have any tips to still make the story more interesting? Or if I should drop the idea of mentor pov?

Writing from an Observer Narrator's POV

When you tell the story from the POV of a character who is part of the story, but who is not the protagonist and does not have an active role in moving the story forward, you've got yourself what's called an "observer narrator." This is someone who experienced the events of the story firsthand but was not a primary player in the events, or they may have observed them from the sidelines and through hearsay, or a combination. A couple of popular examples would be Nick Carraway in The Great Gatsby, who tells the story of his neighbor, Jay Gatsby--who is the protagonist of the story. Also, Ninny Threadgoode from Fried Green Tomatoes at the Whistle Stop Cafe, who tells the story of her sister-in-law Idgie and her partner, Ruth. (The end of the movie implied that Ninny and Idgie were the same person, but this was not the case in the book.)

I think in your case, since the narrator is also using the protagonist to further their own goal, this character probably does drive the story a little, even if it's indirectly. I think as long as you understand how that goal ties into the conflict, the protagonist's role, and the protagonist's goal, and keep that central to the story, it should probably work just fine! :)

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

I’ve been writing seriously for over 30 years and love to share what I’ve learned. Have a writing question? My inbox is always open!

Learn more about WQA

See my ask policies

Visit my Master List of Top Posts

Go to ko-fi.com/wqa to buy me coffee or see my commissions

[linkspooky]

Spinner vs Deku - The Ordinary Everydude Protagonist

This post came about because I read somewhere, someone pointing to the fact that Spinner doesn't parallel any of the main class 1A kids. Shigaraki parallels Deku, Toga parallels Uraraka, Shoto parallels Dabi, then what about spinner? This is not true actually, though, because Spinner.... also parallels Deku. They are both green.

Beyond that though, the role of protagonist of the villain side has been split between two characters. Shigaraki is the main plot mover of the villain side, he's the character which the main conflict of the story, but also Shigaraki is a fully formed character with an incredibly specific and detailed backstory. The audience isn't really meant to find him relatable (though I do but, that's beside the point).

To use an example from super hero comics, Bruce Wayne / Batman is meant to be a character with a detailed backstory, he's not meant to be relatable because we are not all millionaires sadly. However, the point of spiderman is that he is just a kid from new york who randomly got super powers and patrols the block. We are supposed to see ourselves in spiderman, because, the entire point of spiderman is that he could be anyone. The best adaptations of Spiderman (Ie, the Miles Morales movie) stay true to this concept of the character.

So, for My Villain Academia, Horikoshi split the role of protagonist between two people, Spinner who is so far unimportant to the story, unrelated to the main conflict, an everyman guy but also a character whose perspective is important because the audience can find it relatable. Then Shigaraki who is Horikoshi's well-developed OC who the story revolves around. Therefore you have one perspective character who narrates, and helps the audience understand the other character who the story revolves around. If you want an example for literature, the book is called the Great Gatsby, the plot revolves around Jay Gatsby, but the story is told by some dude named Nick Carraway and filtered through his perception. The plot revolves around Shigaraki, but it's relayed to us by Spinner.

It's in this role that Spinner parallels Deku, and once you start thinking of them in that sense that they are both characters the audience is meant to relate to and see themselves in their similarities become even more clear.

1. Empty Cosplayers

Despite all the deliberate parallels between Shigaraki and Deku set up, backstory wise Deku actually has a lot more in common with Spinner. They are both members of a group affected by the prejudices of quirk society, Deku is quirkless, Spinner not only has a heteromoprh qiurk, he doesn't even have a useful one like a few of the other heteromorph kids in the hero course, he just sticks to walls.

They learn from a young age that society is unfair, and ti's also unfair towards them. They are also both victims of bullying. which society around them seems to deem as acceptable. Deku is tormented by the same kid for years and nobody stops him, Spinner lived in a backwater town and he just accepted everyone telling him he was worthless. They also both developed nerdy / fanboy personalities, and leaned into their interests as a response to being bullied. Spinner is a gamer, Deku is a fanboy of heroes, and it's been commented upon several times his desire to collect hero merch is a nerdy hobby.

The greatest thing they share in common however, is their main motivation at first is how much they want to become like the hero they idolize. Deku is sort of an empty character motivation wise, he doesn't have a backstory reason like Shoto, he doesn't really ever articulate why he wants to save others, he just wants to be like the hero he admires that always smiled while saving others. However, if you were tor read Spinner's foiling of Deku, because Spinner is much more articulate of his reasoning, you could say that both Spinner and Deku were so tired of being weak and helpless and unable to change their circumstances, they both admired someone who fought against the world with all their strength, Stain in Spinner's case, All Might in Deku's. Deku and Spinner are themselves people who are somewhat empty and lacking in internal motivators, but they are also moved by great feelings, to strive to do great things, even in circumstances where they are powerless. They are also, very specifically, moved to take their very first steps towards acquiring something by the desire to save others, Deku by his desire to save Bakugo which makes him move when he's powerless, Spinner by his desire to support Shigaraki which makes him fight an entire crowd of people with much more powerful quirks than he has.

They also both dress up and cosplay like their heroes. Spinner s costume is deliberately modeled off of Stain, he carries a bunch of knives around at first, because that's what Stain did. Deku wears the green outfit with the bunny hood, because it's meant to look like All Might. He copies a lot of All Might's moves at first, without thinking about how to adapt them to his body.

They also both started out as nerdy slash weak kids who were moved to get stronger by the chance to be like their heroes. Spinner just started doing sit ups apparently, Deku worked out for months until he could even inherit the quirk All For One. Most importantly though they are not only cosplayers they are empty cosplayers, Deku and Spinner don't really have a complex and nuanced understanding of both All Might and Stain they just both admire them as their personal heroes. Deku still to this point has a hard time seeing the flaws and critiquing All Might's mistakes. Spinner doesn't really think critically about whether Stain was right or wrong. They're both caught up in admiring both as symbols for what they represent. All Might as a hero whos aves everyone with a smile. Stain as a force of change for a society, that was for Spinner, stagnant and oppressive.

Which means they also repeat some of their predecssors mistakes. We just went through an entire arc of Deku doing the exact same thing All Might did, which was cut everybody off, and try to solve every problem of Hero Society alone, despite the damage it was doing to his body and his Mental Health.

Stain's failure was specifically because he tried to revolutionize hero society all alone, not only did his actions not result in the reform he wanted when he was stopped, but Shigaraki was able to use Stain's image to recruit other people into the league of villains who didn't really agree with Stain's idea of reform of hero society, and instead wanted destruction. Now we have spinner who has become the face of a revolution the same way that Stain was, that he is also quickly losing control of now that AFO has become the head of the League of Villains.

Spinner of course admires the idea of destroying the old society and replacing it with something new, but I think in these chapters he's quickly realizng that, what new thing they replace it with might not be better if someone like AFO who thrives off of control and centralizing power to himself has a say in it. That is once again, Spinner becoming his hero, but not realizing his faults. Spinner actually has a strength that Stain doesn't have, the ability to work with others, to sympathize with them and comprehend their motivations to the point where they can see the humanity in someone like Shigaraki. And it might be Spinner's specific strength over Stain, that allows him to retake control of the narrative that Stain lost control of, and AFO is currently trying to take control of.

2. You Looked Like You Needed Saving

Spinner and Deku are also connected because on the villain side and hero side respectively, they are the first two characters to verbalize that Shigaraki is someone who might be in need of saving.

Within two chapters of each other, while everybody else remarks upon Shigaraki as a god of destruction, or some kind of divinity, it is both Spinner and Deku who express concern from him as a person.

The reason they are both able to connect to the normal human side of Shigaraki, is because that is their role essentially, as the narrator / perspective character for each of their halves of the story. However, it is also because they are both essentially just normal people.

Now whether Deku is actually a good deconustrction of the chosen one myth or not, or whether he's actually a good protagonist isn't really the point here. Deku is set up by Horikoshi in his role as the story, as just a normal person, who got dragged into all of this mess. Deku is suposed to be Spiderman. Not a special chosen one, but a normal kid struggling along to keep up with everyone else. Deku doesn't immediately understand the complex nuances of the world around him, because he's supposed to be the audiences way of working out the complexities in what seems like a light hearted story about a super hero academy at first but then becomes a much darker deconstruction. The idea Hori is trying to get across again and again is that Deku is nobody special, just a normal kid struggling.

Spinner is also an everydude struggling to keep up with his peers who are all, more powerful, and also have much more specific motivations than him. It's Spinner's role in the story, to try to learn to comperehend the nuance of these people. If Deku is supposed to show us the more human and nuanced side of the heroes in the story and how they struggle, then Spinner is meant to relay to us the villains.

Which is why Spinner starts out with no motivation at all, and starts out as being the one to question and antagonize Shigaraki, only to change his mind once he sees other sides of Shigaraki. Spinner is a perspective character, his journey isn't about being the strongest, or working out a lot to get jacked, but rather to gain perspective of the world, and that was also supposed to be the intended purpose of Deku's solo arc.

Deku and Spinner are both characters who start out with no specific motivation except admiration for their heroes, and no direction in life, because they are supposed to gain some over the course of their journey. Their journeys also, are becoming less and less about being individually strong, and more about learning to reach out to others. Deku admired All Might's ability to save everyone alone with sheer super strength, but in his solo arc he couldn't live up to that image he crashed and burned. Spinner admired Stain's ability as just one man to change the world alone, but now in Stain's position as the face of a revolution, he's kind of powerless and in a position where he could be manipulated by AFO very easily.

He's on a tight rope right now. The solution to both of their problems, is to once again open up to the network people around them. Deku needed to reunite with Class 1A. Spinner's plotline is likely going to revolve around bringing the scattered pieces of the league back together, while AFO tries to keep them seperate and easy to control.

Spinner and Deku are also both characters who are motivated to go out into the world, and try to understand it, because of their desire to save people. This is also where they differ. It's actually interesting how they contrast, because they both even admit they admire Stain, Deku really early on in the story says he can understand Stain at least but not Shigaraki. Stain is also, as much of a fanboy of All Might as Deku is. See they admire different aspects of Stain, a character who is meant to be the first instance of blurring the line between hero and villain. A villain character, a murderer, who is explicitly a fanboy of heroes, and unlike Shigaraki doesn't want to destroy heroes entirely just make them better. There's a heroic side to Stain, and a villain side, and Deku admires his heroic intentinos, whereas Spinner admires the lengths Stain will go to to bring about change even if it means taking violent action.

Spinner will just kill people. That's an important part of his character, he is an empathy character, he's an everyman, but he's also very specifically an everyman who joined a terrorist cell to kill people. Spinner is able to make sacrifices for what he determines to be a greater good. He will even sacrifice the many for the few, he'll disrupt the safety of common people in order to get what he thinks is better. However it's because Spinner can empathize with the individual over society, that he's able to make connections with people like Shigaraki and may even become his salvation.

Beating up Shigaraki does not work. The heroes will try and try it again, but it just does not work. Gran Torino told All Might not to try even talking to Shigaraki, and he got worse. Deku got angry and beat the ever loving crap out of Shigaraki, and then he got possessed by AFO and got worse. Endeavor burned Shigaraki alive several times, and then learned his son was also a villain and the situation got worse. Violent suppression is just not going to work for Shigaraki, which is why Spinner's empathy which values individuals over society is being set up as important. Because, the world isn't strictly utilitarian. When an individual is being oppressed, sometimes you have to inconvenience the whole of society, in order to help that one individual. That's what heroes are supposed to do you know, go above and beyond?

I believe the story is setting up these two seemingly opposite points of view, Deku who values the peace of mind of everyone over the suffering of the individual, and Spinner who values an individual like Shigaraki over the whole of society who is also the story's biggest victim and someone in need of saving, in order to make them both compromise with each other. That is, the story is probably setting them up to work together, as people coming from both sides of hero and villain to save Shgiaraki. The pro-heroes just won't reach out to Shigaraki, their strategy again and again has just been to put him down. Deku is someone who wants to save Shigaraki, but his every method so far has failed, because he's very clueless as to how society works.

When they come together from different ends of society and work together their compromise will be able to bring out the strengths of each of their perspective. Spinner is much, much better at looking at the nuance of society than Deku ever will be, because he's been down in the muck fighting in the front lines to begin with. Deku is also someone who will be able to help Spinner direct his actions towards a more just cause, which is something Spinner wants to do, he wants to bring about a more just future like Stain wanted.

Spinner and Deku are probably going to team up, and my evidence for this is how woefully incomplete Uraraka's supposedly grand speech that's supposed to be a turning point in the story is. I think this is at least in part meant to be deliberate, because, Uraraka freezes up in the middle of her speech when she talks about how hard the heroes have it, and how the heroes and the public should be sharing the burden so everyone can smile together in the end, as she thinks about how she deliberately caused Toga to cry by denying her empathy, or even a chance to talk.

DUraraka's speech about how life is just as hard on the heroes and they're suffering right alongside of us, because they're people too, deliberately leaves out the most dehumanized members of society, the villains. Uraraka hasn't yet reached the point where she can tell the public that villains aren't symbols of hatred and fear the same way that heroes aren't symbols of strength, they are all just people struggling in a complicated and messy world because she hasn't reached that point herself. Therefore, Uraraka's speech seems to be only half the solution to the problem of the current society. Heroes have it tough, but, also what about the villains? I'm hoping, Horikoshi deliberately left that out, because the kids are not at a point where they can save their villainous counterparts, and they need someone with the other half of the answer to lead them there.

Therefore, if Uraraka parallels Toga, if Shigaraki parallels Deku, if Dabi parallels Shoto, all in the fact that while being villains on the outside, but also children who need to be saved, because they represent what all three could have grown up into had their lives been a little tougher on them then, what does Spinner parallel to? That's easy, Spinner is going to be the one to save them, because before even any of the kids got to that point of sympathy, Spinner was the one who was trying the hardest to comprehend the motivations of his friends and see them as people. Spinner is going to become the "My Hero" of the villain side and step up as a savior, rather than as a person who needs to be saved. Spinner parallels Deku in that he too, is just an ordinary every dude who can step up to become a hero.

[lol-jackles]

Well, I know Harrison Ford was Hans Solo, but I honestly can’t tell you the name of the guy who was Luke. Also, did the Luke actor do anything else? Your whole lengthy essay about “protagonist “ etc. is like a High English lecture. Dean was the hero and Sam was the damsel in distress. Period. Castiel was just a mess and the story went downhill from there. Boom! Simplist explaination.

It doesn't matter that you didn't know the name of the Luke actor, Luke is still the protagonist of Star Wars. That's how George Lucas wrote him and literally millions of fanboys will tell you the same. Luke had to be rescued by Ben, Han, and Leia, just like countless protagonist have to be rescued before taking control of their fate and changing the story. In Thelma & Louise, the film's protagonist Thelma had to be saved by Louise from being raped, and then Louise killed the would-be-rapist. But Louise doesn't change as a person, Thelma does and drives the plot.

Nobody said Dean isn't the hero, but he's the hero with a little "h" while Sam is the Hero with the capital "H" because he has the greatest arc. A hero isn't always the protagonist if they don't drive the plot and change the story. Let's put it this way, all stories need a protagonist, but not all stories need a hero. The Great Gatbsy Jay Gatsby is the protagonist, a flawed and dishonest man, as seen through the eyes of Nick Carraway, who is an unreliable narrator due to his own dishonest nature.

In Willa Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, Charlie is the hero and main character. We want him to win the golden ticket and for good things to happen to him. But Charlie is not the protagonist because he doesn't grow or change over the course of the story. He starts out a nice kid and ends up a nice kid. Willy Wonka is the protagonist because he changes and grow and in the Johnny Depp version, seek out his father for reconciliation.

[kamyru]

Voltage Inc LIs as literature characters (including mangas)

Kuranosuke Kiba

as Riviere (from "Night Flight" by Antoine de Saint-Exupéry)

That's not a popular choice, and I highly doubt that there are people who have heard about this book at all. It's a short novel, and please, read it. It's fantastic. Riviere is in my top 5 favorite literature characters. They are both bosses with a metal fist who don't take "I can't" as an answer. Yet, thanks to them, their departments are so successful. At the same time, even if they are considered Devil's cousins by their subordinates, they are more human than most people. 

Jun Araki

as Fitzwilliam Darcy (from "Pride and Prejudice" by Jane Austen)

That's pretty obvious. Both Darcy and Araki judged their future lovers wrong. Moreover, their lovers did the same thing. Araki is not as scary as he can look. And just like Darcy, his subordinates adore him. Both of them made mistakes and had prejudices, yet they have redemption arcs that show that they are more than that.

Shusuke Soma

as Jay Gatsby (from "The Great Gatsby" by F. S. Fitzgerald)

Unlike the Darcy-Araki pair, this one is not as obvious. Yes, Gatsby did what he did for a lost lover. He was ready to act out of his character to find her. It's impossible to deny his obsession. At the same time, he is a pleasant and interesting human, with a mystery that people love so much. And here's Soma, who acts out of his character for revenge. Yes, their reasons are different. But they both are the same. Their obsession with what they want is a sick one. Jay Gatsby is a classical rep of an anti-hero. I have never said it before, yet, I think that all the characters in "Her Love in the Force" are, more or less, anti-heroes.

Jin Namba

as Sherlock Holmes (from all the Sherlock Holmes stories by Arthur Conan Doyle)

For me, Namba is the true detective of the series. He has this laid-back attitude when he works and knows more than anyone can imagine. He is such a good detective, but he lacks common sense. Isn't it the perfect description of Sherlock Holmes? Unhealthy relationships with others, nearly no information about their background, ready to do the strangest things to solve a mystery.

Kunihiro Kasai

as Roy Mustang (from "Fullmetal Alchemist" by Hiromu Arakawa)

Just take a look: they are both born leaders with a power greater than people give them credit to be, want to become the leaders to change what is already rotten, are a mess in day-to-day life, and are playboys (I know that Roy isn't one, but that's the role he wants to play). It's not hard to underestimate Roy when you first see how dumb he can be. However, throughout the series, he is one of the strongest alchemists. It's hard to argue that out of all the human alchemists, Roy is the strongest. And here's Kunihiro, who looks like a lazy playboy, drunk on power. Only later do we understand how much he has worked and still works. 

Takaomi Tsugaru 

as Howl Jenkins Pendragon (from "Howl's Moving Castle" by Diana Wynne Jones)

For me, this is the most obvious one. I know that Ayumu may look like a better choice for Howl. But hear me out. Howl is an egocentric talented wizard, who plays with girls' hearts but never commits, doesn't want to get involved in sh*t that isn't his, cares about how he looks more than about how he acts, is a total mess, gets entertained by Sophie's comebacks, helps her to discover the power she didn't think she had, considers himself a monster. And here's Tsugaru, who has hidden depression, does what is strictly required, plays with women's hearts, yet has no idea what a relationship is, can't let anyone near him because he's a "monster", thinks highly about his looks. They are both toxic men turned normal because they have found the perfect match. No wonder I want to write a fic that has these resemblances as the theme.

Toshiki Kasumi

as Shogo Kawada (from "Battle Royale" by Takami Koushin)

Shogo is my favorite character ever. I am not the biggest "Battle Royale" fan, yet he is a fantastic character. He knows more than he shows, has the experience, looks scary and intimidating, has a tragic backstory, knows how to interact with people when needed, can think while stressed, and is selfless. Kasumi is the same. They both have the strongest empathy possible, even when anyone else would have lost it. I think that a lot of RMDAOC characters have their equivalents in Battle Royale. Yet, I don't remember enough many of Shogo's classmates to make a list.

Toshiaki Kijima

as Schagerström (from "Charlotte Löwensköld" by Selma Lagerlöf)

Wasn't Schagerström's wife dead for five years at the moment of the beginning of the book? I don't remember. They are brothers from different mothers. The same thing can't be said about their lovers, yet that's another story. Scared for others, isolated, workaholics, deeply in love with someone they think is way out of their league, and both of them are cutie pies. 

Hideki Ishigami

as Ginko (from "Mushishi" by Urushibara Yuki)

Firstly, they both have this comforting coldness around them, like you want to hug them for hours, but your know you can't because they won't let you. Orphans, trying to find their paths, avoid people, are intelligent, talk little, and are kings of sarcasm. They would look at you like the dumbest person and then help you without asking. And they both have a sad background and no home to come back to. 

Taro Akuchi 

as Shizuka Doumeki (from "xxxHolic" by CLAMP)

Taro's role is to protecc and atacc, but most importantly, to make readers simp. He does everything for Suzu and doesn't ask too many questions. From time to time, he can be sarcastic and is known for his bluntness. Yes, Watanuki's attitude towards Doumeki is different from Taro's towards Suzu, but that's it. Doumeki is there to protecc, atacc, and enlarge the xxxHolic fandom. Tall, strong, intelligent, skillful. Also, they both do romantic things that no one expected them to. And look like they are the main men's mother or wife.

[snailsnfriends]

one of this fandom's major problems regarding the story of the Dream SMP is a lack of understanding the complexities of trauma, abuse, and mental illness. another problem is this fandom's lack of knowledge on how characters work in narratives. to be fair, I see it in other places like twitter and tiktok more, but it happens here too on occasion.

people are so quick to point out character flaws and use them as justification for why a character is completely evil and has been all along, when that's simply not the case. for example, c!wilbur was one of the heros of l'manberg, but after the final control room and the stress of the elections, he spiraled into what was pretty much a mental breakdown, with his paranoia getting the best of him and clouding his better judgement. this paranoia was just a defense mechanism for him; it's better to be skeptical of everyone and not get hurt than to trust people and lose everything. that's just what happens when you've been hurt repeatedly, and this is common in people who suffer from depression or an anxiety disorder. as a result, those who have either gone through something like this or have studied it will know that it isn't uncommon and will treat the matter delicately and with proper analysis. everyone who doesn't know any better will simply point fingers at them being the villain because that's a much easier thing for them to do, despite how incorrect it is. not only does this show their lack of knowledge on mental health, but it also shows their lack of knowledge when it comes to character analysis and writing.

as for how characters work, c!wilbur is very simple. he's a tragic hero; his personal flaw of paranoia and mental illness causes his fall from grace, and we, the audience, feel sympathy for him because we watched his journey unfold. other characters that fit this mold are Macbeth, Romeo from Romeo and Juliet, Oedipus, and Jay Gatsby to name a few. it's a very common trope because it can be easy to write but complex to analyze (it's also just fun but that's my opinion). none of these characters or c!wilbur were evil, they just had extreme flaws that ultimately led to their downfall (for the Greek ones, this is called hubris). none of these people were "bad from the beginning." honestly, most of these characters aren't even bad people, they just have flaws that causes them to make poor decisions or hurt other people. it's also important to note that this kind of trope is more realistic than the average hero role because people are multidimensional, and when you're roleplaying, it may be easier to be more human than character. also, this trope makes these characters relatable to the audience, and when these character flaws have to do with mental health, they are going to be extremely relatable to many people and should be handled with extra care.

TL;DR: c!wilbur and c!quackity were never evil from the start. they act the way they do as a result of their trauma and mental illness. labeling them as evil from the start is also wrong simply based on how characters are written in narratives. in conclusion, lack of nuanced thought my abhorrent, and pay attention in your English classes.

im convinced that the people saying c!quackity has been manipulative and evil from the beginning are the same as people who say that about c!wilbur

[snailsnfriends]

spicy hot take grab your oven mitts: just because a story is simple, doesn't mean that the story is bad. using recognizable tropes, narrative techniques, and character journeys isn't a bad thing, ESPECIALLY for amateur writers and actors. two wonderful examples are c!wilbur being a tragic hero and the cycle of abuse in the exile arc.

tragic heros are one of the most classic character tropes to use. from Oedipus to Macbeth to Jay Gatsby, the tragic hero trope is very common. it's so common because it's easy and fun to write and act for. you also have a good amount of freedom in this trope, which adds to the fun. there are pleanty of resources on tragic heros out there and pleanty of examples of them, and going with a "safe" choice here really proved to be effective. c! wilbur is one of the most interesting characters on the server, yet he's easy to understand as long as you pay attention.

the exile arc and c!tommy and c!dreams relationship directly follows Lenore E. Walker's cycle of abuse: tensions building (c!dream digging the hole to blow up c!tommy's stuff), incident (blowing up c!tommy's stuff, arguing, aggression, threats, intimidation, physical abuse), reconsolidation (gives excuses, claims that it is not that bad), calm/honeymoon phase (giving c!tommy the trident, time c!tommy spent mining, allowing c!tommy to keep his armor during his party). this is a very recognizable cycle, and part of why it hit so heavily for some people. it wasn't overly complicated, but it was realistic, and easy to follow. as a result, the arc succeeded in what it needed to achieve and it is wildly respected and appreciated by the fandom.

using "easy/simple" stuff is never a bad thing. it helps ensure that things flow smoothly, and it's great for those just starting out with writing and acting.

Can I just say: One of my least favourite arguments, that is so overused as to become cliché on this website, is this notion that:

"Interpreting Wilbur/L'Manburg in a straightforward way is a DISSERVICE to cc!Wilbur's brilliant storytelling!"

Like, don't get me wrong, I like the writing of Season 1. I think Wilbur is very proficient at weaving together a grand narrative tension with engaging character journeys. No question.

But. Season 1 is many things, but I, personally, don't think it's a transcendentally subversive nouveau art experience of storytelling. It's - at its core - a fairly conventional story. That's what makes it so strong in my opinion, actually.

Like, if cc!Wilbur was going for that, I'm sorry to say, but he did not succeed.

Dream SMP Season 1 (and, honestly, S2 as well for the most part) work with some pretty recognizable tropes, narrative techniques, character journeys and structures and framing.

There's clearly been a shift from early S1 to late S1 - but I really don't think that's cc!Wilbur pulling the wool over eyes for almost a year.

I don't buy that.