#just because someone ended up with a different interpretation from you doesn't mean they didn't read the comics at all

[jesncin]

"this person clearly hasn't read the comics, they're making stuff up instead of being accurate to canon"

Fool,,, I've read the comics AND MAKE THINGS UP. You can do BOTH

[0rczy]

I really like analyzing Varigo, one thing I've noticed recently is how different their approach to romance (and human connections in general) really is, but also how they're pretty much the perfect foils in this regard.

Varian grew up sheltered away in their mansion. He didn't have much clue about socializing, so when Rapunzel came to him, he gives all of them proper respect (calling Rapunzel "Princess", Eugene "Flynn Rider", as in the full name). You could assume it's because of his dad; later when the two confronted each other, Varian called him "Sir". Probably because Quiring taught him to be respectful of others, and they both clearly take this social rule rather seriously.

So then Cassandra comes in and saves Varian, for apparently no selfish reasons. She likely just didn't want to have a child get crushed when she could've prevented it, but to Varian, this changes his view on people. Cassandra isn't just a distant figure to respect; instead, someone he could have a connection with. And this is where one of Varian's most essential traits come to light: when comfortable, he treats situations like an experiment. He immediately starts calling her by a nickname, "Cassie", to see how she would react. At the day of the expo, he keeps trying out different tactics, trying to essentially just get close to Cassandra. One could Interpret this romantically, but I personally like to think he just really wanted a friend. A lonely kid, seeing someone cool show any kind of affection for him immediately made him go "there could be something here! I need to find out!", and so he does. In his own, nerdy way.

Hugo, on the other hand. He, unlike Varian, grew up having to socialize all the time. Having to talk his way out of situations constantly, he learned to put up walls so that the most desirable results come out, benefiting him and his missions. When he weasels his way into the Team, he also calls them nicknames. In his case, it stems from a need to distance himself from people, so that he doesn't get attached. One slight exception though is Varian, as Hugo seemingly not only uses nicknames on him to keep up built-up walls, but to get a reaction out of him. This is very similar to how Varian approached Cassandra when he was younger. He's interested in Varian from early on, and he handles this in his good old Hugo fashion, because he finds Varian entertaining. Varian at first doesn't trust Hugo, but when he proves himself trustworthy, he gives in. He's willing to reach out, making Hugo more than a means to an end. Eventually, the two become friends! Then more than friends!

And then, their approaches change.

I'd like to think that it was Hugo, who fell first. Or at the very least, he's the first to realize it, and he HATES THIS. His flight or flight is activated, and he really wants to flee. He's the type to ignore his feelings, try to bury them. That's all he knows how to do, really. Especially because for what could be the first time in his life, he's actually falling for someone who is his friend. Someone who means a lot to him! He wouldn't want to ruin things, especially because he knows that betraying Variant will break the guy's heart, once he finds out. Therefore, the less pain, the better.

Varian is the exact opposite of this. It takes him a long time to figure out what he feels, and that it could be romantic (he didn't exactly have the history with romance before. The "puppy crush" on Cassandra could have easily been more of an obsession with the possibility of someone showing affection towards him). But once he realizes that there's a chance that the two could be a thing? He doesn't have to think hard about what his next step should be: he likes Hugo, and he's a scientist. Trial and error is practically in his blood at this point, so if there's even a small possibility of them getting together? That Hugo likes him back? Varian will do anything to find out how probable his theory is. And so, once again, he treats the situation like an experiment. Wasting no time, he tries to confess or bring up the idea as quickly as possible. And Hugo FREAKS OUT. He's not ready!

Varian's other big trait is his stubbornness. He's not satisfied with an uncertain answer. He wants to know Hugo's view on them, as clearly as possible. So he keeps poking around, trying to find an approach that brings out different reactions, different answers as to why Hugo would be scared of them being together. Again. Really similar to how he treated Cassandra at the expo back then. This is the only way he knows how, though. And he needs clear answers.

He gets one at the last trial. Boom. Heartbreak. This isn't about angst though, so I'll end it here.

I find them so interesting. How their upbringing influenced their view and approach to people, to friendship, to romance. To each other. They are both scientists, but one is more afraid of the results than the other.

So it all boils down to the importance of clear communication: another big theme in Vat7k, what with Ulla and Donella setting an example as what not to do.

I could ramble about these characters for ages, but yeah. This is my view on them, I loooove reading different Interpretations in fan fiction though!

[blazinghotfoggynights]

Can Team Tuck and Team Buddie please agree that both can exist and serve as positive spaces for queer male representation?

I've been thinking. Let me run something by you.

Oliver says he has always felt Buck was a bi-coded character? Right?

Does that mean when TK thought Buck was hitting on him, he was?

If Buck was always bi, but just didn't know it, are we supposed to believe he never flirted with Eddie just because his first kiss was with Tommy?

Was Tommy his bi awakening or was Tommy the embodiment of the attractive traits he has seen in a man he's been falling for over five seasons?

You can like or even love multiple people. Even at the same time! 😮

Believing that Buddie is or should be the endgame does not negate or disrespect Buck's arc with Tommy in any way. I question if Tommy was just a convenient character. He's a safe guy to explore Buck's evolution with. He has a history with members of the 118, but he is not integral to the cast. If it doesn't work out, he is easily explained away. Remember Natalia?

I think it is possible to have a Buck and Tommy centered arc, focused on Buck becoming comfortable with his sexuality and exploring it in a healthy, positive way and still have Buck and Eddie eventually realize they have been each other's person for years. Having both doesn't make the other any less important. How many people have dated others when their eventual life partner was right there? They had no idea they saw that person in that way.

Now that we know Buck is bi, it could lead to different interpretations of scenes:

Buck is looking at Eddie. Tommy is not there and we don't know for sure who Eddie was speaking to.

2. Look at that smile and his eyes at the end. Buck positively beams and bats his eyes when he realizes Eddie is going to look at him. That's how platonic friends look at each other?

3. But we can take it all the way back if we have to. Look at Buck when Eddie compliments him.

3b. Do you know what that reminds me of?

4. If Buck has subconciously been into guys for a long time, then this scene takes on a whole new context.

Moving closer to the other man? Check.

Eye contact? Check?

Smile and shy head duck? Check.

*I'd like to state that I have no doubt Edmundo Diaz knew Buck was into him. Look at the reaction.

5. When I'm into someone, you know what I don't talk about? Someone else.

6. Wow. Look at how Buck looks at Tommy.

6b. We have never seen that before have we?

Buck x Tommy and Buck x Eddie can coexist in harmony. Life stories are long and have jumpscares, plot twists, plot holes, etc.

Buck being genuinely attracted to Tommy doesn't mean that all the scenes from the past five seasons that made us all side-eye Evan Buckley didn't happen.

If we never get Buddie, let's just take the win. ABC said, "There are queer men in the world who are masculine, hot, and relatively stable. Let's show that."

Do we really need to talk about how the LGBTQ community was represented on their former network? I could stand on that soapbox and go off for days. Let's just say I know others who also felt some way about it, whether they were straight, queer, or allies.

I am just going to enjoy what is shaping up to be an amazing season. Moving to ABC breathed new life into 911 and I am excited. (Season six? Can we just not talk about it?)

[tbmkit]

Las Nevadas Ending...

where do i even begin with how wonderful that was... the ending to las nevadas really fits, and i'll explain why.

i think, in a way, it represents how alex himself couldn't find closure on the dream smp. bad memories, bad actors, so much drama... i think, just like that, c!quackity also didn't have a good ending. he could never find closure, he lost all his friends, everything he held dear -- all gone.

nothing was necessarily out of place -- it was exactly how it was meant to be. the ONLY thing that i think was missing was a bit of closure with c!foolish. the bits with c!slime felt SO perfect.

c!slime was like... all that c!quackity had left. he was his everything. if you love them, let them go. he let c!slime go and he let him finally go after being so controlling of him and the person he was. he realized that if he was still controlling over c!slime, he'd be continuing the cycle of abuse inflicted onto him. the possessiveness, he had to realize that it was just a cycle. to ME, the interpretation i got from c!quackity's arc as a whole, was the cycle of abuse and him finally getting closure. he, although battered and bruised and ran through hell, he finally realized that it was time to put an end to the cycle.

a lot of people called it empty or vague and i truly think if you were paying attention you'd realize every single bit was intentional. every single aspect of it was planned and every line and scene was meant to be there. if you paid attention you'd realize the overall story and message (because yes! there are so many deeper meanings to a lot of things that even i realized when i rewatched clips!)

i truly think that alex meant to do this in such a different way, and thus that's why people felt it was off. he couldn't give him the "true" ending, but i think this is more or less what he had planned regardless. i think other characters could've helped further along the point of breaking the cycle, but obviously they couldn't show up. had c!dream or c!wilbur been able to make an appearance, he would've been able to do a lot more. obviously, they couldn't and shouldn't be there. hell, even c!schlatt could've actually appeared to hammer the point home and i would've been fine with that.

all in all i think c!quackity's end is perfect. it fits, it's symbolic, it was beautifully portrayed and alex did an amazing job acting. he doesn't get enough credit for his acting holy shit he is amazing at that.

yk, as i'm writing this, he replied to someone on twitter calling c!quackity his comfort character. i think that also proves to show how much emotion he put into his performance. you're amazing quacks :(

[jesterkoops]

I have a couple of things I mused about in comments around here that I feel like developing into their own post. Since this one's gotten too long, I'm going to split them in two separate posts.

Re: Mark & Gemma

There's a lot of debate/denial about whether their love transcended severance or not, and also linked to the question of when love does transcend severance and when it does not. I honestly don't know if this is an answer the show will ever give us, or is something that will always be left to interpretation.

But, for Mark & Gemma, it did not transcend. Not completely at least. Definitely not on Mark's side.

This is canon and repeated again and again both in universe and by Dan, Ben, and Adam. So there's no way around this. No "well, but he did grow attached to Ms Casey". Attached is a strong word. He was empathetic towards her as another fellow innie/human being, and wanted to help her. His sculpting the tree has to do with the pain/guilt he carries within him (and we know the body stores the trauma; also reason why they're testing this new chip on Gemma), and the love o!Mark had for Gemma, but has nothing to do with how i!Mark feels towards Ms Casey.

And I think the answer to why it didn't is two-fold.

I think one reason it did not transcend is because Gemma is fitted with a new generation chip that is designed to provide an even stronger barrier than the one currently in use and do things the current chips can't do, like sever someone multiple times. So just as it stops the trauma of the miscarriage when she has to dismantle a crib, it might stop any chance of love transcending once she's on the severed floor as Ms Casey. And Ms Casey is something else entirely. Ms Casey seems to be something Cobel was trying that was harnessing this new chip in some new way. While Gemma's testing floor innies are still a Gemma in a different environment with her memories wiped, Ms Casey seems to have more than just her memories wiped. It's like what was wiped was also that humanity that allows that human connection with other people. I think that persona would not be able to trigger any "muscle memory" of having loved her in Mark because Ms Casey is a empty shell of Gemma, not just a Gemma in a different environment. Contrast this with Helena who carries Helly inside her, and viceversa, and how that does permeate to Mark on the outside.

The second reason, and perhaps the most important, is something @maatdraws explained quite nicely already, and that is that Mark's love for Gemma looks like had already started to fade by the time of her 'death', as we see in 2x07. Like I said in a comment under that post, writers don't include details and content for no reason. Not to bring everything back to ASOIAF/Jaime Lannister, but it reminds me of people dismissing Jaime's boner in the bath with Brienne as "well guys get boners all the time, no big deal!". Yeah, except this is not a real person, it's a character in a story, and when the writer points your attention to a reaction or a line or a detail it's for a reason that is supposed to drive the plot. They did want to hint at Mark's investment in the relationship withering away, leading up to that "I said I love you" from Gemma before she leaves. That line they also gave Dr Mauer when one of Gemma's innies is about to leave the room in a clear parallel. And how it's clear in that scene that she her response is forced because she does not love him.

I don't obviously mean that Mark doesn't love Gemma the way Gemma doesn't love Dr Mauer of course. He does love her. But that that love had started to cool off. Maybe because that's the way it does end up being in many many marriages that start and develop through those same traditional check-boxes we saw them tick in 2x07 (and tbh he is just a pretty bad listener and rather apathetic, look at his dynamic with Alexa too - just like he didn't listen to Gemma about ants vs plants, he didn't listen to Alexa about her being from Montana and not Minnesota). Maybe also because he is someone who checks out when things get difficult.

Which also explains the way he reacted to her death. Suddenly things were OVERWHELMINGLY difficult, so what does he do? Quite quickly after her death he goes off and severs himself, so he can spend 8 hours a day turned off, and the rest drunk or asleep, with Gemma's stuff in the basement out of sight. He doesn't even try to mourn her. He doesn't even give himself time to say "I can't cope with the grief". And I think that a lot of that pain was guilt more than actual grief. Guilt at not going with her, guilt that he could have been better, guilt that the last thing he said to her was a distracted goodbye where he had to be prompted. But had she not "died", he would have probably just continued to drift away. Would this have led to a divorce? Probably not. But it might have just turned into one of many lukewarm marriages.

And I think this might tie in with what Dan's vision for the show has been since the beginning, and the ending he often talks about being unchanged despite the evolution of the show. That Mark was always meant to never get his wife back. I kind of started to put the pieces together while replying to comments under an anon I was replying to and thinking about the original outline - the one where Mark and Helly did not have a romance and Dan considered making Helly the wife, but then created Ms Casey/Gemma because Helly would have been too easy to guess. If Mark and Helly were not meant to be romantic, and Helly being the wife was a viable option, it might mean Mark's love with his wife was never meant to transcend severance. And once they created Ms Casey/Gemma, Helly became her own character and she was 'free' from the plans Dan had for an endgame and could become her own story. And her relationship with Mark could become its own thing. Again, it reminds me of GRRM's original outline for ASOIAF, where Jaime was supposed to be the 'evil king' character and then he split this character into Jaime and Cersei and each character became their own thing with their own arc.

But the endgame where the wife is concerned remained unchanged. If you combine it with so many quotes recently from Dan and Ben about this always having been the story of someone who becomes whole through accepting their pain and grief, it adds even more weight to this idea. Or the fact that Dan said he didn't have a clear plan for Ms Casey/Gemma beyond her being the wife and the Cold Harbor stuff. What pain and grief is there to accept for Mark now that his wife is alive? The pain of acknowledging he was losing her even before he lost her, and that the choices he made after she was gone mean he is going to lose her anyway.

And/or maybe... maybe Mark's grief isn't over Gemma, but over himself. He has to let go of the person that he was in order to move on and become a better man. That also fits with the theme Dan talked about of becoming whole through discovering new parts of yourself and embracing them. Maybe o!Mark's journey is to realise that Mark Scout is the past and he should let it go. And that he was not all that great after all. He said it to Reghabi that maybe he could have done things differently, and listened more, and Mark S IS doing better and listening more ("I'm a little nervous"/"Turn around and bend over" vs. "I am nervous"/"Me too. It's ok."). And that by embracing Mark S he can move on to a new, better version of himself.

[eemamminy-art]

If you're willing, would you share some of your thoughts about zenos? I just met him in my playthrough and I'm already obsessed and curious about how people misinterpret him

I have many thoughts on Zenos ahaha you can find a lot of my long-winded rambles about him in my tag for him! There will definitely be spoilers in this for both stormblood and endwalker, so if you're just going through stormblood for the first time I'd advise saving this to read later!

But in reference to the thing I was talking about with my partner yesterday was mainly like, how there's this idea people have of Zenos that he enjoys killing when it's simply not the case. Now don't misunderstand-- he doesn't hate it either. He's not remorseful. He's not even trying to justify the action. It's just totally meaningless to him.

When he's urging on the wol to be more violent and to let themselves loose against him, it's not for the sake of simply sowing more destruction. He wants to bring the wol down to his own level in order to debase himself. The reason he wants to encourage the wol to hurt him is because being challenged by them is the only thing making him feel alive. The destruction is something of just a natural consequence of that, of showing the wol that Zenos sees them as two sides of the same coin. Zenos is the emperor's attack dog more than his son, the wol is in turn the alliance's attack dog more than their ally (or so he thinks!).

When he talks about "the hunt" it's less this whimsical mass murder that people point it out to be, and really him seeking purpose, meaning, and happiness in the only messed up way he knows how. As a child he was only given praise and attention for causing harm, so he seeks an opponent that can harm him in return so he can feel something, anything. When he's collecting weapons from fallen warriors, they're not trophies or spoils of war, he's specifically interested in the history of the weapons.

I think it's maybe easy to forget, I mean stormblood was so long ago now and while the characterization is still there in endwalker, it's colored by the perception of others. Isse and the other Domans choosing freedom over fear, no matter how hopeless things are.

Jullus wanting to know why he would betray his countrymen and pleading to his empathy, when Zenos was shaped into a weapon by that empire and holds no love for his nation. Alisaie telling him that while he may have found a spark of joy in fighting with the wol, without empathy for others he will find himself alone and bereft of the one thing that makes him happy.

Zero trying to wrap her head around the way Zenos discarded lives as though they were nothing, while bearing some undefinable emotion toward the wol (obsession, competitiveness, devotion, fondness-- she's not able to define it and I think it's meant to be vague for the player's sake). All these characters in their words with and about Zenos do lay it out clear that he is someone who is devoid of emotions except for the relationship he has to the wol, but I think because they are rightly condemning him for the lives he has taken and destroyed, people misconstrue that to mean he likes killing. There's a sort of malice attributed to his actions when it's really just nihilism.

Now, I'm not saying that because he didn't like it, it means it's fine or something. I know people like to interpret it that way when you like a villain in anything lol. All this to say, this idea of Zenos being a psychopath gleefully murdering people is so far from the truth. He's a very broken man with deep traumas and depression, finding happiness only in wanting to be hurt and killed by the wol.

Maybe at the end of the day, it doesn't matter whether he likes it or doesn't-- I find to most people it makes no difference, so it's easy for them to conflate the two things. But I think Zenos' very existence challenges how the player views their own actions. In the same way that Elidibus in the ShB 5.3 quest Faded Memories reflected back at them all the death and destruction that the wol has caused-- intentional or not-- I think Zenos serves a similar purpose narratively. He questions why, he questions what are good or evil really, and asserts that there's no point in trying to find a justification for death and murder.

I can see why it makes people uncomfortable! He's reminding the wol that they have killed just as much as he did, and questioning the "justice" behind the wol's actions. It's an uncomfortable thing to think about. I think it would be fun to have a wol that comes out of endwalker as a pacifist tbqh!

(Not to get on a tangent, but I totally thought post-HW and especially with the DRG 70 quest, that Estinien was going down that road. I was really sold on the idea just by my own interpretation of his actions and words, only for him to be not only just fine with fighting still but to be actually kind of into it for the sport, just with more humility and empathy now. Total missed opportunity imo! But this is not a post about Estinien!! 😤)

Going back to Zenos though, I think it's easier for people to not grant him a shred of empathy and to write off all his actions as those of a madman. He does after all say he wants the world to burn, for the selfish reason of having the wol all to himself. I get it's uncomfortable for the player character to be the one at the center of his attention. I get it!! But gosh there is a much more interesting character in there than just "guy who gets off on killing", if you just open your eyes and ears for a moment.

I do think that, given the themes in ffxiv's story overall, that granting empathy and forgiveness to even the worst of people is kind of the driving force behind a lot of characters' motivations. Raubahn recognizes Ilberd did all he did for the sake of their shared nation's freedom and future; Estinien recognizes Nidhogg was grieving and in pain as much as he was, leading to vengeance; Hien recognizes the cruelty of her family and others in Doma failed Yotsuyu every moment of her life, shaping her into a tyrant; Lyse recognizes the unrest in Ala Mhigo failed Fordola, pushing her into the false hope the Empire offered; all the scions and the wol recognize how the unsundered ascians bore the responsibility of their entire people on their shoulders and did the unthinkable to try to save their own; Wuk Lamat recognizes Sphene acts out of love and preservation for her people, no matter what it takes. On and on and on.

So I find it odd that Zenos never gets that sort of grace! It's easier to just make an enemy out of him than to see things from his perspective, even while most of the other antagonists are given some degree of empathy while still acknowledging they were wrong and had to be stopped.

He's really neat. I'd put him under a microscope and study him if his ass wasn't too big to fit on the slide.

[kalinara]

So the discussion in that prior post reminded me of this set of panels from the Krakoan era X-Men Annual:

So I find this exchange fascinating for many reasons and it makes me think a lot of thoughts. And I'm going to try to articulate them here.

Behind a cut because it's long.

My initial knee-jerk reaction was puzzlement. Because I do think that Scott has always wanted a way to control his powers. The whole risk of losing his glasses and accidently killing someone has been a thing for him all along.

In the past, the few times he's had temporary control over his abilities, such as the time they all almost became demigods in First Class, the time Emma/Cassandra Nova spiked his brain in Astonishing X-Men*, when he was in the future in a manufactured body, raising Nathan, he's been pretty enthusiastic about the whole thing.

(The Astonishing X-Men thing is interesting, and I've expressed some of my thoughts about it in the comments of this post. TLDR, I love the storyline a lot, though my own personal opinion is that Scott's inability to control his powers is physical, not psychological. But I also think the story works with that interpretation with the idea that an unscrupulous enough telepath could temporarily force a fix. It just requires us to assume Emma, or rather Cassandra Nova through Emma, is lying. That's not a stretch.)

But then, I start to think about how, in the various stories where Scott does have temporary control over his powers, it's because of something done to him. The First Class story had all of their powers going wild. Astonishing X-Men was a psychic ice-pick lobotomy, basically. The manufactured body was future/alternate Rachel's creation.

It occurs to me, with contemplation, that while Scott has been overjoyed, relieved, or grateful at the temporary reprieve from his powers - he never actually seems to seek out a fix for them himself. He never, as far as we know, asks Elixir or Triage to try to fix the brain damage. He doesn't ask Cecilia Reyes or Kavita Rao to perform brain surgery on himself. He doesn't ask for a Shi'ar clone body or anything like that.

And whenever the subject of a "Cure" shows up, Scott expresses sympathy to the people who have it worse than he does, but has never expressed interest in it himself.

Even before Krakoa, there've been a lot of possible solutions in the more fantastic or science fiction aspects of the Marvel Universe, and except maybe for one time in the sixties, Cyclops has never actually pursued any of them.

--

And then, of course, there's the complicated aspects of Krakoan resurrection in general.

I mean, basically, if you look at it one way, the vast majority of the X-Men cast are dead. What we have are basically clones that have been brainwashed into believing they're the originals.

I don't really agree with that interpretation. I do think that, via Cerebro or something else, the resurrected mutants are continuations, not off shoots. Whatever the "soul" is, they seem to have it.

That said, we do have cases like Talon vs. Wolverine (Laura version). Or Hank Prime vs. current Hank. The latter isn't even a full reproduction! His memories stop at the Avengers era.

It actually puzzles me a bit that more mutants don't express concern about this. Maybe it just comes from the idea that when you're hunted all your life, you're not going to look a gift horse in the mouth.

But it does raise interesting questions though.

We're already looking at cloned bodies with implanted memories. How much can you change before the new person stops being the old person?

Laura ended up with an adamantium skeleton because someone got confused. Quentin Quire basically created a wardrobe of very different bodies to embody whenever he wanted. Xavier has, at least once that we know of, specifically deleted memories that he didn't want to transfer into his new incarnation. Sinister was able to corrupt the resurrection process and take control of quite a lot of the Council that way.

As I said, I do believe that the characters we have now are fundamentally the characters we've always known. I think about how Wanda, in particular, only got her memories back to a really early Cerebro recording for herself, but through magic was able to obtain the rest. She wouldn't be able to do that if she wasn't "herself" in some magically important way.

This is, to me, more like the idea of William Riker's transporter accident or John Crichton's duplication in Farscape. Both are the "real person" and a soul isn't finite.

But it's interesting, and I wish we got more of an overt examination about how these characters FEEL about this.

Part of the fun with comics though is that we do get to play with concepts like this, and we can analyze the story and the characters, and their history to come to some conclusions ourselves.

Like Scott, I think, is no stranger to resurrection in general. The grasshopper concubine of the Phoenix can't be. At various times, he's seen Xavier die and come back, Magneto die and come back, Logan die and come back, he himself has died and come back, and of course, of course, there's Jean Grey.

But at the same time, I can definitely see Scott as a man who is incredibly resistant to the idea of changing a fundamental part of himself in the process. (Though he did seem okay with regrowing that eye that Hope shot out in Rosenberg's run.)

Anyway, it's just fun to think about.

But that said, there's a Doylistic element too. And one that, as a non-disabled person, I'm probably not the best person to weigh in on.

I do think it's worth noting that, even if many of us don't think of him as such, Scott Summers is a canonically disabled person.

He can see. WITH assistive technology. Without assistive technology, his choices are blindness or obliterating anything in his direct line of sight.

I think that disability representation, even in a more fantastic context, is important. If that means that occasionally the writers have to create reasons why a character wouldn't use a fantastic or science fiction solution to cure their injury or illness, then okay. That's probably something that the creative folks will decide on in a case by case basis. And I'm not really equipped to weigh in except to say that I personally am okay with the idea of Firestar no longer suffering from cancer due to her powers, but I'd prefer any solution that Cyclops finds to the issue of his powers be strictly temporary.

[marzipanandminutiae]

Eggers confirmed in interview that Ellen wasn't a child, she was teenager at the start of the film. You can probably say there's case of ephebophilia. But there is no CSA there. Also Eggers absolutely saw it as Dark romance and ships it himself. He wouldn't be doing it if there was CSA.

And that's fine, but not everyone accepts Word of God as canon

My thoughts on Eggers' interview statements are that he should have made his intentions clearer if that's what he was going for, because a huge portion of the audience came away with the impression that it was about someone's stalker/rapist coming back to jeopardize the life she'd made for herself out from under his thumb. And like...if he wanted people to not think that, he should have made directing choices that made the onscreen story match his vision better.

You're free to interpret it however you want. What I take issue with is people saying that there's One True Interpretation and no viable way to see it in any other light. There's one interpretation that the director intended, but the movie he actually made leaves holes to interpret it a different way. He shouldn't have made it that way if he had a very specific story to tell.

How can I see it as CSA? Simple. She said she was "a child" when it started and even if she was a young teenager, it being the early 1830s (assuming she's like 20-23 at time of canon, based on statistical age at first marriage for women back then) doesn't magically make 15-year-olds adults. 15 back then was about like 17 now- not a Tiny Baby, but decidedly not a Full Grown-Up either. "Child" CAN be a euphemistic term for a naive or inexperienced adult, but it's not always

And maybe if he wanted people to not interpret her as a literal child...he shouldn't have had her characterize herself that way in the dialogue, talking about when all of this started? "I was so young," "I didn't know better," "I was a fool," "I was naive," etc. SO MANY clearer wordings there. They already didn't get a child actress to play her in the opening scene; without that line, I'd assume it had been like. A few years before her marriage, when she was maybe 17-18, and just seen it as abuse rather than arguable CSA. It's a weird dialogue choice if he wanted to convey "the vampire sex started when she was young but not unacceptably young," like many other weird choices that I felt were counterproductive to his stated narrative aims.

Doesn't mean my interpretation is objectively correct either! But you don't see me going around saying that there's No Way Anyone Could See It As Consensual And That's Wrong And Bad.

I have both been there and done that before, coming from a fandom (Crimson Peak) where there's no way to interpret a central relationship as peer CSA/COCSA if you go by Word of God, but there's absolutely space for that based on what ended up in the actual movie. And I've had to make peace with it, even though I ship that couple to the moon and back.

You like these fake people kissing in this way, and other people don't. And that's fine! You don't need a big moral justification for it, or to have the Single Correct Interpretation!

[blueishspace]

Hero, Villain God 40

(Prev) (Next) (First)

*Grian's pov*

Pearl is the one to open the door and let you in, as you walk inside her apartment you see Martyn and Cleo are already on the couch while Scott seems to be preparing some ..food? You can't really tell what it is but you have to assume It's some kind of snack.

"Finally, we were waiting for you guys for a while now... Pick a spot on the couch while I go set up the first movie"

"That sounds good... ...so, what movie's first?"

Scott perks up at that, you can guess It's probably one of his, either that or he's just really excitedby the idea of watching movies in general.

It was the former, it is one of his, you feel very smug for something that is completely unimportant.

Mean girls is a pretty strong start for this whole marathon thing, you didn't expect a story about mortal highschoolers to be even remotely close to being entertaining but you aren't going to lie... it was actually pretty good.

Scar had never seen it either so you weren't even the odd one out... Also the main "mean girl" character got run over by a bus at one point which actually made you laugh. More chaos! Yeah! Exactly what you want!

... Unfortunately also run out of snacks because Martyn finished them so now you have to wait to get more before the next movie.

The second movie is the one Martyn chose and that Scott seems to be insulted by, the lego batman one... The main problem you don't know what either lego or Batman are so...

"What is Lego?"

Scar whips around so fast you are surprised he didn't snap his neck in the process...

"You don't know what lego is???"

"Nope"

"Pearl told us it was bad but I didn't think it was this bad..." Scott chimes in from the kitchen.

Pearl for once decides to be helpful and explain. "It's a type of toy, plastic blocks that can be connected to build structures and scenes...this movie is going to mostly use a similiar style."

"I see! ... What's a batman?"

So, apparently Batman is a vigilante/hero from some comics that is "super famous" and "known even by non comic fans"... Watching a movie about super heroes. And super villains is pretty ironic considering your situation as both...

As for the movie, definitely fits your brand, It's 1) fun and 2) you don't understand what's going on for half of it. Perfect chaos...though that's mostly because you don't get the references. Still you have... fun, like... genuine entertainment even. There's also at one point a part where the clown guy summons other villains and the room just devolves into you asking who someone is, one of the others being appalled, an explanation and repeat...

After a small break It's time for Cleo's pick, she prefaces to you that's the film is in stop motion and this time you don't have to ask because you already know what that means! From one of the documentaries you watched with Mumbo! You didn't think you would ever gain something from them... something to keep in mind...maybe... probably not.

The movie is definitely different from the other two. On one hand nobody is hit by a bus, on the other you got a song about kidnapping Santa so...

The movie follows what you can only assume to be an halloween deity considering the whole holiday lands thing is strangely similiar to the divine planes you and Pearl and the other gods share. You also know that It's probably not the way the others are interpreting it, or even how It's supposed to be interpreted for that matter...still, it ends up being the movie with the protagonist that's the most relatable to you. Yes, the one about the talking skeleton copying christmas...wonder what that says about you.

This time Pearl doesn't go to set up the next movie.

"Ok, time for a break. We already watched three movies in a row and I'm sure some of you need to go to the bathroom"

That's fair, you don't but the mortals might... As the room devolves into chatter you slowly tune in mentally into what's happening with you...other you... Mother Spore.

[jailforwriter]

Let's get into...

Look, at the end of the day, writing is word choice. You're choosing which words to put in what order to make other people feel Some Type Of Way about the result. But there are 4 bits of advice perennially swirling about the bowels of writing forums that, misapplied, might make you shit the metaphorical bed of optimal communication, and I very much don't want that for you. I'm staunchly pro-avoiding the literary runs, in fact. So let's get into how.

On the chopping block today is my nemesis:

"Cut all adverbs"

I'm not going to pretend that I don't know why this advice exists. All two reasons it exists, even. Let's break them down:

Too many adverbs: we're all guilty of inundating sentences with adverbs. There are many moving components to scenes, and there's often a desire to express every last one of them. It's not enough to say that the ball rolled down the empty street; the reader simply must know that the ball crept exceedingly slowly, cautiously inching downwardly and toward the eerily empty street. But see, that's clunky. It doesn't flow well, doesn't add anything that couldn't have been expressed more concisely through better wording, and, most importantly, it insults the reader's imagination. By overexplaining, you're taking away their (admittedly limited, but crucial!) agency to picture things themselves. Womp womp.

Redundant adverbs: pretentious people have invented far too many words over the years for anyone to be out here saying "ran quickly". Running is inherently quick, my guy. Otherwise, we'd be saying walking or jogging or promenading (yes, really). This is the moment to break out the thesaurus and realize that sprinted, raced, and dashed all say what you wanted them to say and bring an evocative, nuanced vibe to the sentence. And nuance is tasty. Nuance is the sauce that the quirked up white boy (the sentence) was goated with. So we're better off just saying "ran" and saving that adverb for when it's actually trying to communicate complexities, which we'll expound on once we get into why adverbs are hot, actually.

NOTE: this crops up particularly often in dialogue. "Said angrily" is a dialogue tag that may seem inoffensive — until you remember that snapped exists, and furthermore, so does slamming the door in their face.

So then when/where in the annoyingly nondescript hell should I use adverbs?

Fundamentally, when they add meaning to stuff. To elaborate:

Substance: a sad smile is different from a regular smile, and should be described as such. If you just say "they smiled", people will assume it's a "normal" (i.e. happy) smile and call it day. If someone almost smiles, it's also telling us something different than if we'd said that they didn't smile at all; now we can't tell that they found the joke funny but chose not to smile, and the interaction loses substance. (Moreover, waiting and waiting patiently aren't the same thing, as I'm sure your mom pointed out when she still told you off because you "gave her attitude" by breathing too hard while you waited for her to press play on the VCR.)

Pacing: someone shaking their head slowly is different from them shaking their head at regular, normal human speeds. The latter is simple negation, whereas the former has an element of emotional nuance, of why the hell did they do that that way? Was it anger or regret? Denial, maybe? No idea! But now the reader gets to ponder about it, and that's where interest is born, methinks.

Tone: there aren't too many ways to interpret someone saying "I hate you". It's a pretty straightforward phrase, for the most part, deployed with devastating expertise by schoolchildren whose parents won't give into capitalistic fads and buy them a Stanley cup. But if I were to say "I hate you" softly, then ah. Things change. We have contrasting emotions now. Depth. Is it really an "I love you" in disguise? Am I just mad that you're making me order at the counter when you know I get, like, weird when I have to ask them for no pickles? Perchance. The takeaway here is that the adverb made it so that you can't take the sentence at face-value, and that, unlike pickles, is very satisfying.

The other 3 horsemen of the misconstrued writing advice apocalypse (word choice edition) will be coming soon, so please keep an eye out for seals breaking on ominous scrolls. Happy writing!

[pruneunfair]

Cry or better yet beg and The Great Gatsby. *spoilers*

I've seen some comparisons between the two and the speculations that Matthias and Layla were inspired by Gatsby and Daisy.

Aside from the roaring 20s settings, I do agree but also disagree that these two are similar, I can definitely see some similarities but I don't think that Cobyb was inspired by The Great Gatsby and if it was, then Solche REALLY missed the entire point, HARD.

First of all: The Great Gatsby is not a romance. The story itself is about the flaw of the American dream, with themes of class disparity sprinkled in. Yes, there is romance in it but it's not meant to be viewed as "Aw cute, I hope they get together ❤️" The relationship between Gatsby and Daisy represents that failure of the American dream and if you read the book or even just watched the movie, that message was made abundantly clear.

Wheras cry or better yet beg wants to support that romantic relationship between Matthias and Layla regardless of how disgusting it is, it doesn't even represent anything which that isn't a bad thing, not every relationship in a story needs to mean something complex but when you got a toxic ass relationship like that, typically what saves it is a theme of something, usually a theme of abuse patterns in cases like. If you don't got that then what usually gets interpreted is something vile.

As for the characters, instead of them being inspired, they feel either like combinations of characters from the Great Gatsby, the traits of one character, or are divided into multiple characters for Cobyb or they don't resemble then at all.

Matthias for example is what I would call the amalgamation of traits from both Jay Gatsby and Tom Buchanan cranked up to 11.

Gatsby and Matthias have similar goals. They have all this wealth and popularity but what they want the most is the female lead of the story (Daisy and Layla) and how they didn't exactly love the girl as a person but rather as the idea of what they represent (The American dream or in Matthias's case: complete control over a girl who didn't immediately fawn for him)

The difference is in execution, Gatsby does the exact opposite of what Matthias did, everything he did to attract Daisy was designed to impress her and generally make her happy and comfortable and he is completely willing to make changes if Daisy dislikes it such as no longer throwing any grand parties after Daisy doesn't have a good time at the first and only one she has ever attended.

Now here's where Matthias being similar to Tom, except Matthias is WAAAY worse than Tom and that's saying something. Matthias does whatever he can to make Layla cry and he often succeeds, from as little as killing birds to raping her multiple times and all of this is because he's taking out his frustrations on why he's so interested in a girl who didn't completely adore him right off the bat which is excused as "He doesn't know how to express his emotions"

Now, everyone agrees that regardless of all the questionable morality or downright awful behavior other characters in the GG portray, the one thing readers agree on is that Tom sucks, there's no way around it, he is a racist, cheats on Daisy, sexist and has been shown to be physically abusive towards his mistress, Myrtle, etc etc.

I want you to put that in perspective: Matthias made someone like Tom look BETTER in comparison and yet you are still supposed to root for Matthias as a reader.

So yeah, really makes you wish Matthias and Gatsby also had the same ending in common (if ykyk)

In conclusion: Just read The Great Gatsby, it is so much better to read.

[fridgrave2-0]

We share so many headcanons for Felix and Turbo that it's actually so exciting to see someone who shares a perspective very similar to mine on their characters! I feel like Turbo while dating Felix was less grumpy and sad as a lot of people interpret him :[ like he's not a perfect person ever and he has a million flaws but he also lived as king candy for a while. He's gonna be a little silly, I think. In fact, I think he'd only get that way (mostly) bc of Felix. Like Felix saw this mentally ill guy and went, "I can make him WORSE!" And then justified it to everyone as "I don't know what happened he just went insane!" for almost 30 years. I'd bet half my money that he even coined the term "going Turbo"

YES, EXACTLY, THIS!!!!

let the guy feel happy and silly in a company of someone who's "safe". turbo cannot allow to change others' perception of him by acting out of the line (aka his constant "I'm the best" bravado), but with felix he can relax a little and have a moment of peace when he doesn't have to put on a façade so much. but in the end, the only time he didn't wear a mask was when he was all alone after roadblasters, and being apart from felix was exactly what set him free

felix can't understand anyone else's problems until he goes through something similar and it gets shoved in his face, and even tho he liked turbo a lot back in the day, he was ignorant to things what were troubling turbo. his need of attention and appreciation wasn't normal, and there's only two options: felix supported it to the point when it got out of control, or he was dismissing turbo's concerns and frustrations. I don't see turbo as someone who understands his own emotions, and felix isn't a guy who would help him and guide him into healthier ways of seeking attention because felix himself is just immature and doesn't look outside of his bubble. if he feels good and happy and that his life is fulfilled, that means everyone else like turbo or ralph or else feel that way too. "you have your game, you are a main character, you earn your rewards. what else do you need?" felix would say, genuinely not understanding how neglectful he is. and turbo, disdained by everyone but felix, cannot explain why it's so important, or give a sign how damaging it is to his self-perception and self-esteem. turbo is already shaped into someone who keeps everything to himself, and seeing that felix doesn't want and won't understand him just makes every negative emotion and every concern accumulate in him, rot and poison him until it's too late

I'm sure turbo seeked for an advise when roadblasters were plugged in, but, as always, he was treated with "you're worrying too much. it's gonna be fine. just calm down. no one is trying to take your place". the same exact place by felix's side turbo doesn't feel he belongs to anymore. the same place for which he stepped over himself to open up, made a crack in a safe shell and was met with ignorance. is this what he tried to bent himself for, to be a different person for someone who just isn't willing to understand? to expose his back to others who are waiting for him to fall?

turbo felt rejected. he was rejected. by players and by the person he trusted most. and then he lost control, let the emotions boil out. and then the games were unplugged, his rivals and his home. he felt the invisible strings tearing up, ripping pieces of him out and living a hole that cannot be filled anymore. his connection to his game, his code, his life and soul

he crawled back to the one he also called home, damaged by another crash, the damage that won't heal anymore, because his game was gone. he crawled to felix, hiding from everyone's sight, scared of seeing nothing but "we knew it would happen" in their eyes. he didn't want to prove their expectations to be right. but when he noticed felix through the cracks in the tunnels under gcs, this was exactly what he saw

"he was so jealous. he was crazy... i should've seen it coming", felix said with a glimpse of regret on his face, too small to show the loss he should've feel. instead, there was it. the disappointment — and nothing else for the long ten years of hiding. his name turned into a common noun, a scary story, a legend he never wanted to be. but still, thanks to felix and his fantasies, his inability too see further than his exes' fake façade, turbo did actually become

a legend

[hijinks-n-lowjinks]

Because of the jjk exhibition and new interview questions with Gege there's been a lot of discourse, specifically about how things ended with Nobara and Gojo.

From what the exhibition attendees can best recall (as recordings inside were banned), Gege stated that he doesn't really want to kill off a character if he knows it won't emotionally affect the readers and a bunch of people are reacting poorly to it. But honestly, I don't really disagree with him. The purpose of deaths in most media to pull an emotional reaction from the consumers! You want your readers to feel emotionally tied and affected by that loss! If you kill a character just to kill someone, that's when it's purposeless and pointless.

I think some people are taking this way too literally and interpreting it as "gege kills for shock value" which does NOT equate to what he was saying, in my opinion. Every death has some impact on the characters, the plot, or the underlying meaning of the narrative.

Nanami's death is the most understandable of all of these. As a mentor figure, he was already at risk just because of tropes of the genre and storytelling in general. His death provided motivation for Yuuji and gave us a strong feeling of loss and a desperation to see Mahito brought to justice. He was also a full grown adult so his death was less of a shocking tragedy and more of a painful loss. I don't think there's many people who who debate this.

Now let's get to Nobara. I might be in the minority here, but I believe her death did mean something! Jjk has always discussed themes of throwing kids into situations they aren't fully equipped for and how their youth and lives have been taken away from them out of a sense of duty. Nobara's death is exactly meant to lean into this. She didn't have to die and she shouldn't have died. She was young and made a grave mistake when she shouldn't have gone out by herself! Nanami told her to stay behind because he knew she would be at a heavy risk of injury or death, but because of the culture around her Nobara went anyway. She wanted to help and wanted to be useful. There's a sort of toxic glory in jujutsu society where the strong are held up and revered while also being used recklessly. Nobara shouldn't have died, the same way Haibara and Riko shouldn't have died, but they did. That's the tragedy of it, and jjk is a tragedy and always has been. It was meant to evoke anger and pain, a desire to ensure that something like this doesn't happen again.

Gojo's death is the most complicated. It's the most convoluted and shocking, but I can see what gege was trying to do with it. Gojo is the strongest, but he worked alone and was used to working alone. No one can keep up with him and would just get in his way, so he was somewhat forced to fight Sukuna alone. I believe that the intention behind his loss was to show that even the most powerful can fall, especially when they have no one else they can rely on. The students all have each other. They are meant to be the change to the culture around them, working together to defeat Sukuna and bring about change. We even see this when Yuuta in Gojo's body relies on Inumaki! He's in the body of the strongest, but he wasn't going in alone. That's the difference.

Jjk has shown over and over again the tragedy of the world and hasn't shied away from the reality of loss, grief, and how unfair the world can be. That's the point of all of these horrible things, to show that unfairness. But I don't believe it will end that way! What's the point in showing how sad and nihilistic things are if it doesn't also show hope? I'm certain jjk will have a hopeful, victorious ending but those things come at a cost. That's what I believe gege's intention is.

[blorger]

jkr doesn't like Draco but is also desperately trying to make some sort of point with his depiction, I just think it doesn't translate very well to her audience. - can you explain more?

and jkr is terminally incapable of making a femme-coded villain that doesn't read as attractive - what do you mean by this?

Just to clarify, you're not asking me to prove that jkr dislikes Draco, right? Because that would take ages.

If you're wondering what point jkr was trying to make with Draco's depiction, well... in the post you're referring to I pointed out that we as readers often end up interpreting Draco as good looking (because of the way he's described) and that is just one of the many things that proves the huge disconnect between what jkr wanted Draco to be perceived like and how he's generally understood by the fandom.

Draco was deliberately created to be an amalgamation of things jkr dislikes:

he's evil wealthy

With the unquestioning belief in his own superior status he has imbibed from his pure-blood parents, he initially offers Harry friendship on the assumption that the offer needs only to be made to be accepted. The wealth of his family stands in contrast to the poverty of the Weasleys; this too, is a source of pride to Draco, even though the Weasleys’ blood credentials are identical to his own.

[x]

Notice how jkr herself compares the Weasleys, her genteel poverty-coded ideal family, to the nasty rich Malfoys. Reading jkr's books gives you the impression that she feels some type of way about rich people; on the one hand she started writing hp at a time in her life where she didn't have much money so she gave Harry a secret fortune as a sort of wish-fulfillment, on the other hand, despite what she says she definitely believes that experiencing poverty makes you somehow a better person.

2. he's pathetic

jkr has stated multiple times that Draco is someone to be pitied; in a series where courage=nobility of spirit Draco is a consummate coward and his deliberate femme-coding is there to further give you an overall negative impression of him.

3. he' s a Bad Guy

Like, Draco is on the wrong side of things for a reason, not only that he's on the wrong side in a way that jkr considers to be near irredeemable. Despite jkr herself acknowledging that Draco's beliefs are a natural result of his upbringing

I pity Draco, just as I feel sorry for Dudley. Being raised by either the Malfoys or the Dursleys would be a very damaging experience, and Draco undergoes dreadful trials as a direct result of his family’s misguided principles

[x]

She still considers him to be fundamentally unlikeable.

[x, x, x]

We're not supposed to like Draco, we're not supposed to sympathise with him, we're not supposed to see him as fundamentally redeemable. jkr (as clearly shown by her terf ways) is frankly incapable of feeling empathy for people whose experience cannot in some way shape or form relate back to her and will therefore never truly understand why people like Draco.

Draco, just like Pansy, is built in the image of a standard bully

[x]

and in the hp books, a series with a very black and white depiction of morality, a grey character like Draco can never truly be redeemed.

I don't know about you but my image of Draco differs greatly from jkr's. As I pointed out previously, the books read very differently if you don't hold the exact same worldview as jkr and that is precisely why Draco is a popular character; people are still able to empathise with him, despite jkr's intentions, and many people get a completely different, more nuanced read of his character.

As for the femme coding thing, I'm afraid I was using a hyperbole. I was thinking of jkr's bonkers depiction of Tom Riddle when I wrote that but there's quite a few characters that read very feminine but aren't described very flatteringly (Percy and Slughorn come to mind).

Hopefully this is the answer you were looking for,

xoxo

[danmei-confessions]

I interpret the ending of "Scum Villain's Self-Saving System" (SVSSS) as more of a horror story.

The protagonist is trapped in a lifelong relationship with Luo Binghe, who is so emotionally insecure that the relationship could potentially end in mutual destruction. Unlike the other main leads (MLS) in Mo Xiang Tong Xiu's (MXTX) works, where the foundations of their relationships are clear, Luo Binghe and Shen Qingqiu (SQQ) have a much more precarious dynamic.

It's evident that Binghe is infatuated with SQQ, whether it be Shen Jiu or Shen Yuan, it doesn't seem to matter. I see the fact that MXTX concealed the identity behind the mask as a literal loose cannon revealing it would have caused everything to fall apart. I don't ship Bingmei and Shen Yuan because their relationship is based on a facade. They are obsessed with an image, not the true person behind it. Claiming it's true love is laughable when they idolize and fall in love with a persona.

In reality, both Luo Binghe and Bingmei are in love with the crafted pretend image of the lofty immortal Shen Jiu created and his beauty. LBG is a stallion protagonist for a reason - he was mesmerized with his Shen Jiu looks. Let's be for real, would Bingge would have spared a glance at Shen Yuan without SQQ's identity? The OG stallion is not lacking in beauties? So what if Shen Yuan is funny and loves Binghe for who he is? He's not the only one.

It's almost as if Shen Yuan's denial of reality, his jokes, and dissociation prevent him from confronting the truth. As an internet troll, ending up with Bingmei seems like a punishment. The system purposely chose someone who obsesses over their idol Binghe, the opposite of Jiu, who despises him purposely almost as if the original wasn't satisfied with the ending. Shen Yuan will love Bingmei wholeheartedly, just like fans love their idols regardless of their faults.

Yes, Shen Yuan made sacrifices and helped Bingmei, but no one would react calmly in his situation. Bingmei, the most bipolar character ever, would obviously lose it if he realized the truth. He thought he finally gained approval from the Shizun he worshipped.

I theorize as long as Shen Yuan has the face and voice, Bingmei would still accept him, even though his world turned upside down. Why? Cause he's delusional, he'll accept anything of his Shizun regardless. I think if an identity reveal were to happen, LBH is selfish enough if SY didn't have a Face Reveal to be the 'not my problem' type. SY personality (if you can really call it that since everything he shows to everyone is different than what be thinks/innermonologues) + SJ face and LBH could live happily in his own delusion.

Just look at Bingge. He wanted the 'kind Shizun' because he believes it was an alternate SQQ, not a completely different person. I mean, who will believe with his 600 harem of 'Peerless Beauties' he would settle for SY true face? Oh no, sir/ma'am, he wanted the 'kind Shizun' cause it has SQQ looks, and that's the end of the story.

I don't see Shen Yuan and Shen Jiu as looking alike or being twins, unlike the popular au or fanfics I've seen personally. Shen Yuan feels like a parasite who can't stand alone and just attaches himself to OGShen Jiu's face, body, and everything he worked for. I headcanon his looks as a normal dude, not a peerless beauty from a book.

Like? Why do people who read the book are so surface level with it as if the Male lead's feelings isn't complex enough about OG? I do believe he was charmed by OG, but SY's SQQ feed onto those pre-existing feelings that were already there in the first place.

Why do readers of "Scum Villain's Self-Saving System" (SVSSS) often take such a surface-level approach to the complexity of the male lead's feelings toward the original Shen Qingqiu (OG SQQ)? I believe Luo Binghe was charmed by the original Shen Qingqiu (Shen Jiu), and Shen Yuan's version of SQQ merely fed into those pre-existing feelings that were already there in the first place. In fact, I'll go as far as to say he fell in love with Shen Jiu - an unpopular opinion, but one I stand by.

This isn't about shipping them. It simply doesn't make sense that Luo Binghe fell in love with Shen Yuan's SQQ so easily unless the feelings were already there. This is why he spent his teenage years trying to gain Shen Qingqiu's acceptance and why he transitioned from worshipping the ground Shen Jiu walked on to absolutely hating him, despite not seeing him for years.

I don't think his feelings toward Shen Jiu changed during his time in the abyss; rather, his perspective did. Binghe concluded that the only way to get Shen Jiu's attention was to be cruel. No matter how strong or kind he became, Shen Jiu's disdain for him was an undeniable fact within the canon. Binghe convinced himself that Shen Qingqiu was incapable of love and a terrible human being to cope with the constant rejection.

In the book, Binghe's reaction to Shen Qingqiu's grief over Yue Qingyuan's death is telling. Despite going out of his way to kill the one person Shen Jiu loved most, Binghe is genuinely surprised by Shen Qingqiu's sadness. When he sees how broken Shen Qingqiu is, he doesn't mock or berate him as he thought he would. Instead, he walks away, uncomfortable, because he has to confront the reality that SQQ is capable of love, just not for him.

When Binghe meets Shen Yuan's SQQ, his worldview is further crushed. There exists a reality where SQQ adores him, but it's not the same SQQ. He can't even win SQQ's affection in competition with himself. I despise Binghe, but I feel for him because this must reinforce the idea that something is inherently wrong with him. This realization is so distressing that he starts crying, something he hasn't done since he was 14. Both versions of Binghe are obsessed because that's the only way they know how to love.

To be clear, Luo Binghe isn't bitter about the abuse. Well, maybe it's a part of it, but to me, he's bitter because he was rejected. Had Shen Jiu accepted his love, Binghe wouldn't have gone to the extremes to destroy him and honestly respect to him for rather going through torture than to succumb to a genocidal murder maniac of a yandere.

.

[salty-an-disco]

Wait actually can I ask you to elaborate about relating to Shifty when it comes to plurality? You don't have to, of course, but I'm frankly fascinated by it because my view of Shifty is completely different (I see her as one person who is viewed through many perspectives and situations but in the end is just one person. I guess I see her as someone with many "identity" states but who's nonetheless a singular being). I guess I can see some stuff (I assume you view Shifty taking the Vessels as something that's similar to switching?) if I take a step back from my interpretation of her, but I'd like to hear your point of view and elaboration because I may be completely off and I'm curious.

-- @sacrificial-hare (it's my side-blog so I can't send asks from there lol)

Sure, I don't mind! We may not have opened up a lot about our plurality here, but it doesn't mean we're not willing to lol

I already talked about it a lil bit in this post, but I relate to Shifty as a median system who doesn't really works in very conventional ways.

The way we work is that we have a 'main host' responsible for the current lifestage, and that was probably created to better deal with it (when we properly started school, we made Violet, and after graduating, I was spawned to help us through out loneliness and depression). Because of that, the way Shifty works is very similar to our experience. When a vessel's story is done, their purpose is fulfilled, they can finally step down and rest. When we school was coming to an end, Violet didn't really work as our 'main face' anymore, and with some difficults we had with that transition (stuff I'd rather not get into) it was for the better that she was reclaimed to allow space for a new host to take shape.

And I also had other systems (don't member if they said they were median as well, but they also mentioned relating to her) talk about how they also relate to Shifty as someone who doesn't really see their alters as entirely separate people. We may have different wants and thoughts, but we're still connected by the same center, and still part of the same whole.

Also, since I'm front-stuck as the current host, having other facets pop in to say their piece and then fade back to the background feels a lot like the final battle with Shifty where she's summoning her vessels to say their piece to the argument lol