#like I know I’m not good at speech analysis

[karmas-void]

There’s no rage quite like a literature student getting a average grade in a writing class

[arts-and-drafts]

I decided to start compiling speech patterns and such for the Hermits I watch the most, because being a fic writer is hard sometimes 😭 then I thought “why not share it here?”

so here’s my very rough analysis of my most viewed Hermits, this is just what I’ve managed to gather so please don’t call me out for what I’m missing

-

Scar

Rarely stutters in normal speech. Maybe pauses if he’s started a sentence and doesn’t know where it’s going, but he doesn’t tend to trail off unless something interrupts his train of thought

Stutters a LOT when he’s startled. Also makes ‘hoo!’ noises repeatedly before he finds his words

Lays on the charm THICK when he’s trying to convince someone over literally anything; compliments their looks, their handiwork, and then pitches his proposition in smooth segue. Not one to entertain haggling though (however he DOES do a ‘look if you’ll pay full price I’ll throw in xyz’ thing). King of upselling even the most mundane things.

His tone is cheerful most of the time, no matter what he’s saying. He’ll actually often say very disturbing things with a light voice (ex. when discussing how to retaliate ie “what should we do about him?” “we could kill him! :)”)

Builds and locations somehow are always capitalized in his voice?? Like he says them differently. I can’t really explain it (when he talks about Aqua Town or Scarland or The Big Dig)

Literally has an evil laugh when he thinks of a way to prank someone or mess with people

Hums in thought quite often, and uses “huh!” quite often when confused or finding out something new (Mostly with redstone)

His farewell is almost always “Byeeee, have a great time!” even if the conversation he left was not a pleasant one. I’m almost certain he does this in tense situations just to get under other people’s skin and really push how unbothered he is

Doesn’t tend to insult people, the farthest he’ll take it is backhanded compliments

That said he is not afraid to outright threaten (“I will murder them.”)

References media a lot, both for concepts for builds and in speech (ie his greeting “Well hello there!” is from Star Wars)

Number one exclamation is “Sweet Baby Jellie!”

(More under the cut!)

Grian

Cold opens, both in videos and conversations (rarely says “hello, how are you, etc” when encountering someone, but he does say farewells/‘thank you’s)

Likes to sneak up on people and scare them if he realizes they haven’t noticed him yet, usually does so by getting real close and then yelling (“HEY!”/“HI!”/“WHAT’S THAT?”)

Uses the name of whoever he’s talking to pretty often while speaking to them (“Well, Mumbo, you never know”/“So, Scar, as you can see here-“), same goes for often addressing his audience (“you all”/“you lot”/“you guys”)

Usually pretty focused (when he wants to be) but oftentimes takes a minute to laugh at things he notices in the natural environment (An accidental face in a build, a mob in a strange place, etc)

Takes the lead in a conversation if nobody is the clear leader, but generally only speaks when spoken to if someone else has risen to that spot

Clarifies instructions after something is explained, both to his viewers and to anyone he’s grouped up with (most often seen in the Life Series)

Uses “Pardon?!”/“Beg your pardon?!” most often when surprised or startled (he’s very British), also sometimes uses “Sorry??”

Things are way more funny to him when he’s tired

Deadpans a lot in conversation ie “why not do xyz?” “Well because we’ll horrifically die 😑“

This man is allergic to committing to the bit unless he’s the one that initiated it

Not one to sugarcoat (“how is it?” “well to be honest it’s miserable”)

Number one exclamation is “WHAT?!” (though he often uses “oh my GOODNESS” quite a bit)

Mumbo

The start of nearly every episode is almost a pitch, does the same when bringing up an idea to others (“I have this idea”/“I was thinking”/“I noticed” etc)

Often laughs a little at himself when he speaks

Also often brings up how inexperienced/unqualified he thinks he is with literally any task he’s doing

Gets very distracted with the smallest things

Uses similes a lot when trying to describe a concept (“I’m thinking a this-type thing”/“Something like a [xyz]”/“Imagine like a [thing]”)

His voice gets higher when he’s startled or panicking

A very vocal thinker, which makes sense because he’s a MC Youtuber, but he also just. Seems to think out loud regardless

Comments a lot on the feel of things (“Oh this feels menacing”/“This looks like it’d mess you up”/“This makes it feel very intimidating”), often with building

Extremely modest. However will celebrate when he does something right in redstone/building (“YES! Oh my days, that took forever”)

Once and a while will have a rare banter moment with people he’s comfortable with (ie teasing and making fun)

Related to above, he gets very giggly when he’s hanging out with people he’s familiar with (Grian and Scar most often, but also Iskall)

Number one exclamation is “What on earth?!”

Joel

Greets people most often with “How you doing [name]?”/“How are ya [name]?”

He’s very northern. He often leaves out words in his sentences bc that’s just the way his dialect is (“What you doin’?” vs “What are you doing?”)

Says his th’s like f’s (“somefing”/“nofing”/“finking”) ((Stress also does this))

His jokes/teasing are very deadpan (“I made you this extra thing, because you’re trash at this”)

Actually gives gifts of resources very often, and always leaves it with a little note and signs his name

His voice gets higher pitched when he’s defensive/being extremely cheeky but other than that his tone rarely changes

This man. Flirts so much. If any other person initiates even the slightest of flirty banter he takes that and dials it to eleven I cannot believe this is a straight married man sometimes

Joel commits to the bit 100% of the time (slightly related to above), unless of course it’s jokes about his height

Makes a point to compliment himself if he gets the chance (words most often used are “handsome” “strong” and “humble”, as well as comments about his muscles and physique)

Insults his enemies diminutively (“look at you down there, tiny idiot”/“You’re wrong and also weak”) ((seen most often in Empires SMP)

His most often used insult is “idiot”

When he’s flustered/frustrated he uses “bloody” a lot (ie “bloody heck” or “this bloody thing” (loves to toe the PG line), also uses “blooming” (“bloomin’ heck”)

Most often used exclamation is also “WHAT?!”

Bdubs

Opens videos very jovially, talks almost like a radio host

Breaks down his builds down to the block, spends a lot of time discussing his block pallet choices and giving tips while he builds

Uses the affirmation “sure enough” a lot, and often addresses himself as “Ol’ Bdubs”

Talks affectionately about other hermits often (“[name], the absolute sweetheart, left me some materials”, “[name], you angel!”)

Adding to above, “angel” or “sweet angel” seems to be his most often used affectionate terms

Switches on a dime, though, if he gets offended (which of course causes others to poke fun at him even more)

Calls mobs “stupid” a lot when they don’t do what he wants (but takes it back if he says it to one of his horses ex. “Come here, stupid—wonderful, I mean, beautiful”)

THIS MAN IS THE #1 HORSE ENJOYER. He gets a horse first thing every season and rides it everywhere, and they’re always a focal point of his theme or builds in some regard

Pauses whatever he’s doing to sleep as soon as it’s possible, and gets very antsy if he can’t do it for some reason (“One moment, time to shreep!”)

Related to above, EVERYONE messes with him if he’s trying to sleep in their presence ie breaking his bed over and over, and he gets increasingly more frustrated when it happens

Rarely is soft spoken or quiet, he projects his voice and uses a lot of emphasis in his tone

Either straight up screams (and peaks the mic 😭) if he’s startled or scared, or yells “oh my GOODNESS!!”

Number one exclamation is “HEY!”

[mostlysignssomeportents]

“Disenshittify or Die”

I'm coming to BURNING MAN! On TUESDAY (Aug 27) at 1PM, I'm giving a talk called "DISENSHITTIFY OR DIE!" at PALENQUE NORTE (7&E). On WEDNESDAY (Aug 28) at NOON, I'm doing a "Talking Caterpillar" Q&A at LIMINAL LABS (830&C).

Last weekend, I traveled to Las Vegas for Defcon 32, where I had the immense privilege of giving a solo talk on Track 1, entitled "Disenshittify or die! How hackers can seize the means of computation and build a new, good internet that is hardened against our asshole bosses' insatiable horniness for enshittification":

https://info.defcon.org/event/?id=54861

This was a followup to last year's talk, "An Audacious Plan to Halt the Internet's Enshittification," a talk that kicked off a lot of international interest in my analysis of platform decay ("enshittification"):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rimtaSgGz_4

The Defcon organizers have earned a restful week or two, and that means that the video of my talk hasn't yet been posted to Defcon's Youtube channel, so in the meantime, I thought I'd post a lightly edited version of my speech crib. If you're headed to Burning Man, you can hear me reprise this talk at Palenque Norte (7&E); I'm kicking off their lecture series on Tuesday, Aug 27 at 1PM.

==

What the fuck happened to the old, good internet?

I mean, sure, our bosses were a little surveillance-happy, and they were usually up for sharing their data with the NSA, and whenever there was a tossup between user security and growth, it was always YOLO time.

But Google Search used to work. Facebook used to show you posts from people you followed. Uber used to be cheaper than a taxi and pay the driver more than a cabbie made. Amazon used to sell products, not Shein-grade self-destructing dropshipped garbage from all-consonant brands. Apple used to defend your privacy, rather than spying on you with your no-modifications-allowed Iphone.

There was a time when you searching for an album on Spotify would get you that album – not a playlist of insipid AI-generated covers with the same name and art.

Microsoft used to sell you software – sure, it was buggy – but now they just let you access apps in the cloud, so they can watch how you use those apps and strip the features you use the most out of the basic tier and turn them into an upcharge.

What – and I cannot stress this enough – the fuck happened?!

I’m talking about enshittification.

Here’s what enshittification looks like from the outside: First, you see a company that’s being good to its end users. Google puts the best search results at the top; Facebook shows you a feed of posts from people and groups you followl; Uber charges small dollars for a cab; Amazon subsidizes goods and returns and shipping and puts the best match for your product search at the top of the page.

That’s stage one, being good to end users. But there’s another part of this stage, call it stage 1a). That’s figuring out how to lock in those users.

There’s so many ways to lock in users.

If you’re Facebook, the users do it for you. You joined Facebook because there were people there you wanted to hang out with, and other people joined Facebook to hang out with you.

That’s the old “network effects” in action, and with network effects come “the collective action problem." Because you love your friends, but goddamn are they a pain in the ass! You all agree that FB sucks, sure, but can you all agree on when it’s time to leave?

No way.

Can you agree on where to go next?

Hell no.

You’re there because that’s where the support group for your rare disease hangs out, and your bestie is there because that’s where they talk with the people in the country they moved away from, then there’s that friend who coordinates their kid’s little league car pools on FB, and the best dungeon master you know isn’t gonna leave FB because that’s where her customers are.

So you’re stuck, because even though FB use comes at a high cost – your privacy, your dignity and your sanity – that’s still less than the switching cost you’d have to bear if you left: namely, all those friends who have taken you hostage, and whom you are holding hostage

Now, sometimes companies lock you in with money, like Amazon getting you to prepay for a year’s shipping with Prime, or to buy your Audible books on a monthly subscription, which virtually guarantees that every shopping search will start on Amazon, after all, you’ve already paid for it.

Sometimes, they lock you in with DRM, like HP selling you a printer with four ink cartridges filled with fluid that retails for more than $10,000/gallon, and using DRM to stop you from refilling any of those ink carts or using a third-party cartridge. So when one cart runs dry, you have to refill it or throw away your investment in the remaining three cartridges and the printer itself.

Sometimes, it’s a grab bag:

You can’t run your Ios apps without Apple hardware;

you can’t run your Apple music, books and movies on anything except an Ios app;

your iPhone uses parts pairing – DRM handshakes between replacement parts and the main system – so you can’t use third-party parts to fix it; and

every OEM iPhone part has a microscopic Apple logo engraved on it, so Apple can demand that the US Customs and Border Service seize any shipment of refurb Iphone parts as trademark violations.

Think Different, amirite?

Getting you locked in completes phase one of the enshittification cycle and signals the start of phase two: making things worse for you to make things better for business customers.

For example, a platform might poison its search results, like Google selling more and more of its results pages to ads that are identified with lighter and lighter tinier and tinier type.

Or Amazon selling off search results and calling it an “ad” business. They make $38b/year on this scam. The first result for your search is, on average, 29% more expensive than the best match for your search. The first row is 25% more expensive than the best match. On average, the best match for your search is likely to be found seventeen places down on the results page.

Other platforms sell off your feed, like Facebook, which started off showing you the things you asked to see, but now the quantum of content from the people you follow has dwindled to a homeopathic residue, leaving a void that Facebook fills with things that people pay to show you: boosted posts from publishers you haven’t subscribed to, and, of course, ads.

Now at this point you might be thinking ‘sure, if you’re not paying for the product, you’re the product.'

Bullshit!

Bull.

Shit.

The people who buy those Google ads? They pay more every year for worse ad-targeting and more ad-fraud

Those publishers paying to nonconsensually cram their content into your Facebook feed? They have to do that because FB suppresses their ability to reach the people who actually subscribed to them

The Amazon sellers with the best match for your query have to outbid everyone else just to show up on the first page of results. It costs so much to sell on Amazon that between 45-51% of every dollar an independent seller brings in has to be kicked up to Don Bezos and the Amazon crime family. Those sellers don’t have the kind of margins that let them pay 51% They have to raise prices in order to avoid losing money on every sale.

"But wait!" I hear you say!

[Come on, say it!]

"But wait! Things on Amazon aren’t more expensive that things at Target, or Walmart, or at a mom and pop store, or direct from the manufacturer.

"How can sellers be raising prices on Amazon if the price at Amazon is the same as at is everywhere else?"

[Any guesses?!]

That’s right, they charge more everywhere. They have to. Amazon binds its sellers to a policy called “most favored nation status,” which says they can’t charge more on Amazon than they charge elsewhere, including direct from their own factory store.

So every seller that wants to sell on Amazon has to raise their prices everywhere else.

Now, these sellers are Amazon’s best customers. They’re paying for the product, and they’re still getting screwed.

Paying for the product doesn’t fill your vapid boss’s shriveled heart with so much joy that he decides to stop trying to think of ways to fuck you over.

Look at Apple. Remember when Apple offered every Ios user a one-click opt out for app-based surveillance? And 96% of users clicked that box?

(The other four percent were either drunk or Facebook employees or drunk Facebook employees.)

That cost Facebook at least ten billion dollars per year in lost surveillance revenue?

I mean, you love to see it.

But did you know that at the same time Apple started spying on Ios users in the same way that Facebook had been, for surveillance data to use to target users for its competing advertising product?

Your Iphone isn’t an ad-supported gimme. You paid a thousand fucking dollars for that distraction rectangle in your pocket, and you’re still the product. What’s more, Apple has rigged Ios so that you can’t mod the OS to block its spying.

If you’re not not paying for the product, you’re the product, and if you are paying for the product, you’re still the product.

Just ask the farmers who are expected to swap parts into their own busted half-million dollar, mission-critical tractors, but can’t actually use those parts until a technician charges them $200 to drive out to the farm and type a parts pairing unlock code into their console.

John Deere’s not giving away tractors. Give John Deere a half mil for a tractor and you will be the product.

Please, my brothers and sisters in Christ. Please! Stop saying ‘if you’re not paying for the product, you’re the product.’

OK, OK, so that’s phase two of enshittification.

Phase one: be good to users while locking them in.

Phase two: screw the users a little to you can good to business customers while locking them in.

Phase three: screw everybody and take all the value for yourself. Leave behind the absolute bare minimum of utility so that everyone stays locked into your pile of shit.

Enshittification: a tragedy in three acts.

That’s what enshittification looks like from the outside, but what’s going on inside the company? What is the pathological mechanism? What sci-fi entropy ray converts the excellent and useful service into a pile of shit?

That mechanism is called twiddling. Twiddling is when someone alters the back end of a service to change how its business operates, changing prices, costs, search ranking, recommendation criteria and other foundational aspects of the system.

Digital platforms are a twiddler’s utopia. A grocer would need an army of teenagers with pricing guns on rollerblades to reprice everything in the building when someone arrives who’s extra hungry.

Whereas the McDonald’s Investments portfolio company Plexure advertises that it can use surveillance data to predict when an app user has just gotten paid so the seller can tack an extra couple bucks onto the price of their breakfast sandwich.

And of course, as the prophet William Gibson warned us, ‘cyberspace is everting.' With digital shelf tags, grocers can change prices whenever they feel like, like the grocers in Norway, whose e-ink shelf tags change the prices 2,000 times per day.

Every Uber driver is offered a different wage for every job. If a driver has been picky lately, the job pays more. But if the driver has been desperate enough to grab every ride the app offers, the pay goes down, and down, and down.

The law professor Veena Dubal calls this ‘algorithmic wage discrimination.' It’s a prime example of twiddling.

Every youtuber knows what it’s like to be twiddled. You work for weeks or months, spend thousands of dollars to make a video, then the algorithm decides that no one – not your own subscribers, not searchers who type in the exact name of your video – will see it.

Why? Who knows? The algorithm’s rules are not public.

Because content moderation is the last redoubt of security through obscurit: they can’t tell you what the como algorithm is downranking because then you’d cheat.

Youtube is the kind of shitty boss who docks every paycheck for all the rules you’ve broken, but won’t tell you what those rules were, lest you figure out how to break those rules next time without your boss catching you.

Twiddling can also work in some users’ favor, of course. Sometimes platforms twiddle to make things better for end users or business customers.

For example, Emily Baker-White from Forbes revealed the existence of a back-end feature that Tiktok’s management can access they call the “heating tool.”

When a manager applies the heating toll to a performer’s account, that performer’s videos are thrust into the feeds of millions of users, without regard to whether the recommendation algorithm predicts they will enjoy that video.

Why would they do this? Well, here’s an analogy from my boyhood I used to go to this traveling fair that would come to Toronto at the end of every summer, the Canadian National Exhibition. If you’ve been to a fair like the Ex, you know that you can always spot some guy lugging around a comedically huge teddy bear.

Nominally, you win that teddy bear by throwing five balls in a peach-basket, but to a first approximation, no one has ever gotten five balls to stay in that peach-basket.

That guy “won” the teddy bear when a carny on the midway singled him out and said, "fella, I like your face. Tell you what I’m gonna do: You get just one ball in the basket and I’ll give you this keychain, and if you amass two keychains, I’ll let you trade them in for one of these galactic-scale teddy-bears."

That’s how the guy got his teddy bear, which he now has to drag up and down the midway for the rest of the day.

Why the hell did that carny give away the teddy bear? Because it turns the guy into a walking billboard for the midway games. If that dopey-looking Judas Goat can get five balls into a peach basket, then so can you.

Except you can’t.

Tiktok’s heating tool is a way to give away tactical giant teddy bears. When someone in the TikTok brain trust decides they need more sports bros on the platform, they pick one bro out at random and make him king for the day, heating the shit out of his account.

That guy gets a bazillion views and he starts running around on all the sports bro forums trumpeting his success: *I am the Louis Pasteur of sports bro influencers!"

The other sports bros pile in and start retooling to make content that conforms to the idiosyncratic Tiktok format. When they fail to get giant teddy bears of their own, they assume that it’s because they’re doing Tiktok wrong, because they don’t know about the heating tool.

But then comes the day when the TikTok Star Chamber decides they need to lure in more astrologers, so they take the heat off that one lucky sports bro, and start heating up some lucky astrologer.

Giant teddy bears are all over the place: those Uber drivers who were boasting to the NYT ten years ago about earning $50/hour? The Substackers who were rolling in dough? Joe Rogan and his hundred million dollar Spotify payout? Those people are all the proud owners of giant teddy bears, and they’re a steal.

Because every dollar they get from the platform turns into five dollars worth of free labor from suckers who think they just internetting wrong.

Giant teddy bears are just one way of twiddling. Platforms can play games with every part of their business logic, in highly automated ways, that allows them to quickly and efficiently siphon value from end users to business customers and back again, hiding the pea in a shell game conducted at machine speeds, until they’ve got everyone so turned around that they take all the value for themselves.

That’s the how: How the platforms do the trick where they are good to users, then lock users in, then maltreat users to be good to business customers, then lock in those business customers, then take all the value for themselves.

So now we know what is happening, and how it is happening, all that’s left is why it’s happening.

Now, on the one hand, the why is pretty obvious. The less value that end-users and business customers capture, the more value there is left to divide up among the shareholders and the executives.

That’s why, but it doesn’t tell you why now. Companies could have done this shit at any time in the past 20 years, but they didn’t. Or at least, the successful ones didn’t. The ones that turned themselves into piles of shit got treated like piles of shit. We avoided them and they died.

Remember Myspace? Yahoo Search? Livejournal? Sure, they’re still serving some kind of AI slop or programmatic ad junk if you hit those domains, but they’re gone.

And there’s the clue: It used to be that if you enshittified your product, bad things happened to your company. Now, there are no consequences for enshittification, so everyone’s doing it.

Let’s break that down: What stops a company from enshittifying?

There are four forces that discipline tech companies. The first one is, obviously, competition.

If your customers find it easy to leave, then you have to worry about them leaving

Many factors can contribute to how hard or easy it is to depart a platform, like the network effects that Facebook has going for it. But the most important factor is whether there is anywhere to go.

Back in 2012, Facebook bought Insta for a billion dollars. That may seem like chump-change in these days of eleven-digit Big Tech acquisitions, but that was a big sum in those innocent days, and it was an especially big sum to pay for Insta. The company only had 13 employees, and a mere 25 million registered users.

But what mattered to Zuckerberg wasn’t how many users Insta had, it was where those users came from.

[Does anyone know where those Insta users came from?]

That’s right, they left Facebook and joined Insta. They were sick of FB, even though they liked the people there, they hated creepy Zuck, they hated the platform, so they left and they didn’t come back.

So Zuck spent a cool billion to recapture them, A fact he put in writing in a midnight email to CFO David Ebersman, explaining that he was paying over the odds for Insta because his users hated him, and loved Insta. So even if they quit Facebook (the platform), they would still be captured Facebook (the company).

Now, on paper, Zuck’s Instagram acquisition is illegal, but normally, that would be hard to stop, because you’d have to prove that he bought Insta with the intention of curtailing competition.

But in this case, Zuck tripped over his own dick: he put it in writing.

But Obama’s DoJ and FTC just let that one slide, following the pro-monopoly policies of Reagan, Bush I, Clinton and Bush II, and setting an example that Trump would follow, greenlighting gigamergers like the catastrophic, incestuous Warner-Discovery marriage.

Indeed, for 40 years, starting with Carter, and accelerating through Reagan, the US has encouraged monopoly formation, as an official policy, on the grounds that monopolies are “efficient.”

If everyone is using Google Search, that’s something we should celebrate. It means they’ve got the very best search and wouldn’t it be perverse to spend public funds to punish them for making the best product?

But as we all know, Google didn’t maintain search dominance by being best. They did it by paying bribes. More than 20 billion per year to Apple alone to be the default Ios search, plus billions more to Samsung, Mozilla, and anyone else making a product or service with a search-box on it, ensuring that you never stumble on a search engine that’s better than theirs.

Which, in turn, ensured that no one smart invested big in rival search engines, even if they were visibly, obviously superior. Why bother making something better if Google’s buying up all the market oxygen before it can kindle your product to life?

Facebook, Google, Microsoft, Amazon – they’re not “making things” companies, they’re “buying things” companies, taking advantage of official tolerance for anticompetitive acquisitions, predatory pricing, market distorting exclusivity deals and other acts specifically prohibited by existing antitrust law.

Their goal is to become too big to fail, because that makes them too big to jail, and that means they can be too big to care.

Which is why Google Search is a pile of shit and everything on Amazon is dropshipped garbage that instantly disintegrates in a cloud of offgassed volatile organic compounds when you open the box.

Once companies no longer fear losing your business to a competitor, it’s much easier for them to treat you badly, because what’re you gonna do?

Remember Lily Tomlin as Ernestine the AT&T operator in those old SNL sketches? “We don’t care. We don’t have to. We’re the phone company.”

Competition is the first force that serves to discipline companies and the enshittificatory impulses of their leadership, and we just stopped enforcing competition law.

It takes a special kind of smooth-brained asshole – that is, an establishment economist – to insist that the collapse of every industry from eyeglasses to vitamin C into a cartel of five or fewer companies has nothing to do with policies that officially encouraged monopolization.

It’s like we used to put down rat poison and we didn’t have a rat problem. Then these dickheads convinced us that rats were good for us and we stopped putting down rat poison, and now rats are gnawing our faces off and they’re all running around saying, "Who’s to say where all these rats came from? Maybe it was that we stopped putting down poison, but maybe it’s just the Time of the Rats. The Great Forces of History bearing down on this moment to multiply rats beyond all measure!"

Antitrust didn’t slip down that staircase and fall spine-first on that stiletto: they stabbed it in the back and then they pushed it.

And when they killed antitrust, they also killed regulation, the second force that disciplines companies. Regulation is possible, but only when the regulator is more powerful than the regulated entities. When a company is bigger than the government, it gets damned hard to credibly threaten to punish that company, no matter what its sins.

That’s what protected IBM for all those years when it had its boot on the throat of the American tech sector. Do you know, the DOJ fought to break up IBM in the courts from 1970-1982, and that every year, for 12 consecutive years, IBM spent more on lawyers to fight the USG than the DOJ Antitrust Division spent on all the lawyers fighting every antitrust case in the entire USA?

IBM outspent Uncle Sam for 12 years. People called it “Antitrust’s Vietnam.” All that money paid off, because by 1982, the president was Ronald Reagan, a man whose official policy was that monopolies were “efficient." So he dropped the case, and Big Blue wriggled off the hook.

It’s hard to regulate a monopolist, and it’s hard to regulate a cartel. When a sector is composed of hundreds of competing companies, they compete. They genuinely fight with one another, trying to poach each others’ customers and workers. They are at each others’ throats.

It’s hard enough for a couple hundred executives to agree on anything. But when they’re legitimately competing with one another, really obsessing about how to eat each others’ lunches, they can’t agree on anything.

The instant one of them goes to their regulator with some bullshit story, about how it’s impossible to have a decent search engine without fine-grained commercial surveillance; or how it’s impossible to have a secure and easy to use mobile device without a total veto over which software can run on it; or how it’s impossible to administer an ISP’s network unless you can slow down connections to servers whose owners aren’t paying bribes for “premium carriage"; there’s some *other company saying, “That’s bullshit”

“We’ve managed it! Here’s our server logs, our quarterly financials and our customer testimonials to prove it.”

100 companies are a rabble, they're a mob. They can’t agree on a lobbying position. They’re too busy eating each others’ lunch to agree on how to cater a meeting to discuss it.

But let those hundred companies merge to monopoly, absorb one another in an incestuous orgy, turn into five giant companies, so inbred they’ve got a corporate Habsburg jaw, and they become a cartel.

It’s easy for a cartel to agree on what bullshit they’re all going to feed their regulator, and to mobilize some of the excess billions they’ve reaped through consolidation, which freed them from “wasteful competition," sp they can capture their regulators completely.

You know, Congress used to pass federal consumer privacy laws? Not anymore.

The last time Congress managed to pass a federal consumer privacy law was in 1988: The Video Privacy Protection Act. That’s a law that bans video-store clerks from telling newspapers what VHS cassettes you take home. In other words, it regulates three things that have effectively ceased to exist.

The threat of having your video rental history out there in the public eye was not the last or most urgent threat the American public faced, and yet, Congress is deadlocked on passing a privacy law.

Tech companies’ regulatory capture involves a risible and transparent gambit, that is so stupid, it’s an insult to all the good hardworking risible transparent ruses out there.

Namely, they claim that when they violate your consumer, privacy or labor rights, It’s not a crime, because they do it with an app.

Algorithmic wage discrimination isn’t illegal wage theft: we do it with an app.

Spying on you from asshole to appetite isn’t a privacy violation: we do it with an app.

And Amazon’s scam search tool that tricks you into paying 29% more than the best match for your query? Not a ripoff. We do it with an app.

Once we killed competition – stopped putting down rat poison – we got cartels – the rats ate our faces. And the cartels captured their regulators – the rats bought out the poison factory and shut it down.

So companies aren’t constrained by competition or regulation.

But you know what? This is tech, and tech is different.IIt’s different because it’s flexible. Because our computers are Turing-complete universal von Neumann machines. That means that any enshittificatory alteration to a program can be disenshittified with another program.

Every time HP jacks up the price of ink , they invite a competitor to market a refill kit or a compatible cartridge.

When Tesla installs code that says you have to pay an extra monthly fee to use your whole battery, they invite a modder to start selling a kit to jailbreak that battery and charge it all the way up.

Lemme take you through a little example of how that works: Imagine this is a product design meeting for our company’s website, and the guy leading the meeting says “Dudes, you know how our KPI is topline ad-revenue? Well, I’ve calculated that if we make the ads just 20% more invasive and obnoxious, we’ll boost ad rev by 2%”

This is a good pitch. Hit that KPI and everyone gets a fat bonus. We can all take our families on a luxury ski vacation in Switzerland.

But here’s the thing: someone’s gonna stick their arm up – someone who doesn’t give a shit about user well-being, and that person is gonna say, “I love how you think, Elon. But has it occurred to you that if we make the ads 20% more obnoxious, then 40% of our users will go to a search engine and type 'How do I block ads?'"

I mean, what a nightmare! Because once a user does that, the revenue from that user doesn’t rise to 102%. It doesn’t stay at 100% It falls to zero, forever.

[Any guesses why?]

Because no user ever went back to the search engine and typed, 'How do I start seeing ads again?'

Once the user jailbreaks their phone or discovers third party ink, or develops a relationship with an independent Tesla mechanic who’ll unlock all the DLC in their car, that user is gone, forever.

Interoperability – that latent property bequeathed to us courtesy of Herrs Turing and Von Neumann and their infinitely flexible, universal machines – that is a serious check on enshittification.

The fact that Congress hasn’t passed a privacy law since 1988 Is countered, at least in part, by the fact that the majority of web users are now running ad-blockers, which are also tracker-blockers.

But no one’s ever installed a tracker-blocker for an app. Because reverse engineering an app puts in you jeopardy of criminal and civil prosecution under Section 1201 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, with penalties of a 5-year prison sentence and a $500k fine for a first offense.

And violating its terms of service puts you in jeopardy under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986, which is the law that Ronald Reagan signed in a panic after watching Wargames (seriously!).

Helping other users violate the terms of service can get you hit with a lawsuit for tortious interference with contract. And then there’s trademark, copyright and patent.

All that nonsense we call “IP,” but which Jay Freeman of Cydia calls “Felony Contempt of Business Model."

So if we’re still at that product planning meeting and now it’s time to talk about our app, the guy leading the meeting says, “OK, so we’ll make the ads in the app 20% more obnoxious to pull a 2% increase in topline ad rev?”

And that person who objected to making the website 20% worse? Their hand goes back up. Only this time they say “Why don’t we make the ads 100% more invasive and get a 10% increase in ad rev?"

Because it doesn't matter if a user goes to a search engine and types, “How do I block ads in an app." The answer is: you can't. So YOLO, enshittify away.

“IP” is just a euphemism for “any law that lets me reach outside my company’s walls to exert coercive control over my critics, competitors and customers,” and “app” is just a euphemism for “A web page skinned with the right IP so that protecting your privacy while you use it is a felony.”

Interop used to keep companies from enshittifying. If a company made its client suck, someone would roll out an alternative client, if they ripped a feature out and wanted to sell it back to you as a monthly subscription, someone would make a compatible plugin that restored it for a one-time fee, or for free.

To help people flee Myspace, FB gave them bots that you’d load with your login credentials. It would scrape your waiting Myspace messages and put ‘em in your FB inbox, and login to Myspace and paste your replies into your Myspace outbox. So you didn’t have to choose between the people you loved on Myspace, and Facebook, which launched with a promise never to spy on you. Remember that?!

Thanks to the metastasis of IP, all that is off the table today. Apple owes its very existence to iWork Suite, whose Pages, Numbers and Keynote are file-compatible with Microsoft’s Word, Excel and Powerpoint. But make an IOS runtime that’ll play back the files you bought from Apple’s stores on other platforms, and they’ll nuke you til you glow.

FB wouldn’t have had a hope of breaking Myspace’s grip on social media without that scrape, but scrape FB today in support of an alternative client and their lawyers will bomb you til the rubble bounces.

Google scraped every website in the world to create its search index. Try and scrape Google and they’ll have your head on a pike.

When they did it, it was progress. When you do it to them, that’s piracy. Every pirate wants to be an admiral.

Because this handful of companies has so thoroughly captured their regulators, they can wield the power of the state against you when you try to break their grip on power, even as their own flagrant violations of our rights go unpunished. Because they do them with an app.

Tech lost its fear of competitin it neutralized the threat from regulators, and then put them in harness to attack new startups that might do unto them as they did unto the companies that came before them.

But even so, there was a force that kept our bosses in check That force was us. Tech workers.

Tech workers have historically been in short supply, which gave us power, and our bosses knew it.

To get us to work crazy hours, they came up with a trick. They appealed to our love of technology, and told us that we were heroes of a digital revolution, who would “organize the world’s information and make it useful,” who would “bring the world closer together.”

They brought in expert set-dressers to turn our workplaces into whimsical campuses with free laundry, gourmet cafeterias, massages, and kombucha, and a surgeon on hand to freeze our eggs so that we could work through our fertile years.

They convinced us that we were being pampered, rather than being worked like government mules.

This trick has a name. Fobazi Ettarh, the librarian-theorist, calls it “vocational awe, and Elon Musk calls it being “extremely hardcore.”

This worked very well. Boy did we put in some long-ass hours!

But for our bosses, this trick failed badly. Because if you miss your mother’s funeral and to hit a deadline, and then your boss orders you to enshittify that product, you are gonna experience a profound moral injury, which you are absolutely gonna make your boss share.

Because what are they gonna do? Fire you? They can’t hire someone else to do your job, and you can get a job that’s even better at the shop across the street.

So workers held the line when competition, regulation and interop failed.

But eventually, supply caught up with demand. Tech laid off 260,000 of us last year, and another 100,000 in the first half of this year.

You can’t tell your bosses to go fuck themselves, because they’ll fire your ass and give your job to someone who’ll be only too happy to enshittify that product you built.

That’s why this is all happening right now. Our bosses aren’t different. They didn’t catch a mind-virus that turned them into greedy assholes who don’t care about our users’ wellbeing or the quality of our products.

As far as our bosses have always been concerned, the point of the business was to charge the most, and deliver the least, while sharing as little as possible with suppliers, workers, users and customers. They’re not running charities.

Since day one, our bosses have shown up for work and yanked as hard as they can on the big ENSHITTIFICATION lever behind their desks, only that lever didn’t move much. It was all gummed up by competition, regulation, interop and workers.

As those sources of friction melted away, the enshittification lever started moving very freely.

Which sucks, I know. But think about this for a sec: our bosses, despite being wildly imperfect vessels capable of rationalizing endless greed and cheating, nevertheless oversaw a series of actually great products and services.

Not because they used to be better people, but because they used to be subjected to discipline.

So it follows that if we want to end the enshittocene, dismantle the enshitternet, and build a new, good internet that our bosses can’t wreck, we need to make sure that these constraints are durably installed on that internet, wound around its very roots and nerves. And we have to stand guard over it so that it can’t be dismantled again.

A new, good internet is one that has the positive aspects of the old, good internet: an ethic of technological self-determination, where users of technology (and hackers, tinkerers, startups and others serving as their proxies) can reconfigure and mod the technology they use, so that it does what they need it to do, and so that it can’t be used against them.

But the new, good internet will fix the defects of the old, good internet, the part that made it hard to use for anyone who wasn’t us. And hell yeah we can do that. Tech bosses swear that it’s impossible, that you can’t have a conversation friend without sharing it with Zuck; or search the web without letting Google scrape you down to the viscera; or have a phone that works reliably without giving Apple a veto over the software you install.

They claim that it’s a nonsense to even ponder this kind of thing. It’s like making water that’s not wet. But that’s bullshit. We can have nice things. We can build for the people we love, and give them a place that’s worth of their time and attention.

To do that, we have to install constraints.

The first constraint, remember, is competition. We’re living through a epochal shift in competition policy. After 40 years with antitrust enforcement in an induced coma, a wave of antitrust vigor has swept through governments all over the world. Regulators are stepping in to ban monopolistic practices, open up walled gardens, block anticompetitive mergers, and even unwind corrupt mergers that were undertaken on false pretenses.

Normally this is the place in the speech where I’d list out all the amazing things that have happened over the past four years. The enforcement actions that blocked companies from becoming too big to care, and that scared companies away from even trying.

Like Wiz, which just noped out of the largest acquisition offer in history, turning down Google’s $23b cashout, and deciding to, you know, just be a fucking business that makes money by producing a product that people want and selling it at a competitive price.

Normally, I’d be listing out FTC rulemakings that banned noncompetes nationwid. Or the new merger guidelines the FTC and DOJ cooked up, which – among other things – establish that the agencies should be considering whether a merger will negatively impact privacy.

I had a whole section of this stuff in my notes, a real victory lap, but I deleted it all this week.

[Can anyone guess why?]

That’s right! This week, Judge Amit Mehta, ruling for the DC Circuit of these United States of America, In the docket 20-3010 a case known as United States v. Google LLC, found that “Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly," and ordered Google and the DOJ to propose a schedule for a remedy, like breaking the company up.

So yeah, that was pretty fucking epic.

Now, this antitrust stuff is pretty esoteric, and I won’t gatekeep you or shame you if you wanna keep a little distance on this subject. Nearly everyone is an antitrust normie, and that's OK. But if you’re a normie, you’re probably only catching little bits and pieces of the narrative, and let me tell you, the monopolists know it and they are flooding the zone.

The Wall Street Journal has published over 100 editorials condemning FTC Chair Lina Khan, saying she’s an ineffectual do-nothing, wasting public funds chasing doomed, quixotic adventures against poor, innocent businesses accomplishing nothing

[Does anyone out there know who owns the Wall Street Journal?]

That’s right, it’s Rupert Murdoch. Do you really think Rupert Murdoch pays his editorial board to write one hundred editorials about someone who’s not getting anything done?

The reality is that in the USA, in the UK, in the EU, in Australia, in Canada, in Japan, in South Korea, even in China, we are seeing more antitrust action over the past four years than over the preceding forty years.

Remember, competition law is actually pretty robust. The problem isn’t the law, It’s the enforcement priorities. Reagan put antitrust in mothballs 40 years ago, but that elegant weapon from a more civilized age is now back in the hands of people who know how to use it, and they’re swinging for the fences.

Next up: regulation.

As the seemingly inescapable power of the tech giants is revealed for the sham it always was, governments and regulators are finally gonna kill the “one weird trick” of violating the law, and saying “It doesn’t count, we did it with an app.”

Like in the EU, they’re rolling out the Digital Markets Act this year. That’s a law requiring dominant platforms to stand up APIs so that third parties can offer interoperable services.

So a co-op, a nonprofit, a hobbyist, a startup, or a local government agency wil eventuallyl be able to offer, say, a social media server that can interconnect with one of the dominant social media silos, and users who switch to that new platform will be able to continue to exchange messages with the users they follow and groups they belong to, so the switching costs will fall to damned near zero.

That’s a very cool rule, but what’s even cooler is how it’s gonna be enforced. Previous EU tech rules were “regulations” as in the GDPR – the General Data Privacy Regulation. EU regs need to be “transposed” into laws in each of the 27 EU member states, so they become national laws that get enforced by national courts.

For Big Tech, that means all previous tech regulations are enforced in Ireland, because Ireland is a tax haven, and all the tech companies fly Irish flags of convenience.

Here’s the thing: every tax haven is also a crime haven. After all, if Google can pretend it’s Irish this week, it can pretend to be Cypriot, or Maltese, or Luxembougeious next week. So Ireland has to keep these footloose criminal enterprises happy, or they’ll up sticks and go somewhere else.

This is why the GDPR is such a goddamned joke in practice. Big tech wipes its ass with the GDPR, and the only way to punish them starts with Ireland’s privacy commissioner, who barely bothers to get out of bed. This is an agency that spends most of its time watching cartoons on TV in its pajamas and eating breakfast cereal. So all of the big GDPR cases go to Ireland and they die there.

This is hardly a secret. The European Commission knows it’s going on. So with the DMA, the Commission has changed things up: The DMA is an “Act,” not a “Regulation.” Meaning it gets enforced in the EU’s federal courts, bypassing the national courts in crime-havens like Ireland.

In other words, the “we violate privacy law, but we do it with an app” gambit that worked on Ireland’s toothless privacy watchdog is now a dead letter, because EU federal judges have no reason to swallow that obvious bullshit.

Here in the US, the dam is breaking on federal consumer privacy law – at last!

Remember, our last privacy law was passed in 1988 to protect the sanctity of VHS rental history. It's been a minute.

And the thing is, there's a lot of people who are angry about stuff that has some nexus with America's piss-poor privacy landscape. Worried that Facebook turned grampy into a Qanon? That Insta made your teen anorexic? That TikTok is brainwashing millennials into quoting Osama Bin Laden? Or that cops are rolling up the identities of everyone at a Black Lives Matter protest or the Jan 6 riots by getting location data from Google? Or that Red State Attorneys General are tracking teen girls to out-of-state abortion clinics? Or that Black people are being discriminated against by online lending or hiring platforms? Or that someone is making AI deepfake porn of you?

A federal privacy law with a private right of action – which means that individuals can sue companies that violate their privacy – would go a long way to rectifying all of these problems

There's a pretty big coalition for that kind of privacy law! Which is why we have seen a procession of imperfect (but steadily improving) privacy laws working their way through Congress.

If you sign up for EFF’s mailing list at eff.org we’ll send you an email when these come up, so you can call your Congressjerk or Senator and talk to them about it. Or better yet, make an appointment to drop by their offices when they’re in their districts, and explain to them that you’re not just a registered voter from their district, you’re the kind of elite tech person who goes to Defcon, and then explain the bill to them. That stuff makes a difference.

What about self-help? How are we doing on making interoperability legal again, so hackers can just fix shit without waiting for Congress or a federal agency to act?

All the action here these day is in the state Right to Repair fight. We’re getting state R2R bills, like the one that passed this year in Oregon that bans parts pairing, where DRM is used to keep a device from using a new part until it gets an authorized technician’s unlock code.

These bills are pushed by a fantastic group of organizations called the Repair Coalition, at Repair.org, and they’ll email you when one of these laws is going through your statehouse, so you can meet with your state reps and explain to the JV squad the same thing you told your federal reps.

Repair.org’s prime mover is Ifixit, who are genuine heroes of the repair revolution, and Ifixit’s founder, Kyle Wiens, is here at the con. When you see him, you can shake his hand and tell him thanks, and that’ll be even better if you tell him that you’ve signed up to get alerts at repair.org!

Now, on to the final way that we reverse enhittification and build that new, good internet: you, the tech labor force.

For years, your bosses tricked you into thinking you were founders in waiting, temporarily embarrassed entrepreneurs who were only momentarily drawing a salary.

You certainly weren’t workers. Your power came from your intrinsic virtue, not like those lazy slobs in unions who have to get their power through that kumbaya solidarity nonsense.

It was a trick. You were scammed. The power you had came from scarcity, and so when the scarcity ended, when the industry started ringing up six-figure annual layoffs, your power went away with it.

The only durable source of power for tech workers is as workers, in a union.

Think about Amazon. Warehouse workers have to piss in bottles and have the highest rate of on-the-job maimings of any competing business. Whereas Amazon coders get to show up for work with facial piercings, green mohawks, and black t-shirts that say things their bosses don’t understand. They can piss whenever they want!

That’s not because Jeff Bezos or Andy Jassy loves you guys. It’s because they’re scared you’ll quit and they don’t know how to replace you.

Time for the second obligatory William Gibson quote: “The future is here, it’s just not evenly distributed.” You know who’s living in the future?. Those Amazon blue-collar workers. They are the bleeding edge.

Drivers whose eyeballs are monitored by AI cameras that do digital phrenology on their faces to figure out whether to dock their pay, warehouse workers whose bodies are ruined in just months.

As tech bosses beef up that reserve army of unemployed, skilled tech workers, then those tech workers – you all – will arrive at the same future as them.

Look, I know that you’ve spent your careers explaining in words so small your boss could understand them that you refuse to enshittify the company’s products, and I thank you for your service.

But if you want to go on fighting for the user, you need power that’s more durable than scarcity. You need a union. Wanna learn how? Check out the Tech Workers Coalition and Tech Solidarity, and get organized.

Enshittification didn’t arise because our bosses changed. They were always that guy.

They were always yankin’ on that enshittification lever in the C-suite.

What changed was the environment, everything that kept that switch from moving.

And that’s good news, in a bankshot way, because it means we can make good services out of imperfect people. As a wildly imperfect person myself, I find this heartening.

The new good internet is in our grasp: an internet that has the technological self-determination of the old, good internet, and the greased-skids simplicity of Web 2.0 that let all our normie friends get in on the fun.

Tech bosses want you to think that good UX and enshittification can’t ever be separated. That’s such a self-serving proposition you can spot it from orbit. We know it, 'cause we built the old good internet, and we’ve been fighting a rear-guard action to preserve it for the past two decades.

It’s time to stop playing defense. It's time to go on the offensive. To restore competition, regulation, interop and tech worker power so that we can create the new, good internet we’ll need to fight fascism, the climate emergency, and genocide.

To build a digital nervous system for a 21st century in which our children can thrive and prosper.

Community voting for SXSW is live! If you wanna hear RIDA QADRI and me talk about how GIG WORKERS can DISENSHITTIFY their jobs with INTEROPERABILITY, VOTE FOR THIS ONE!

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/08/17/hack-the-planet/#how-about-a-nice-game-of-chess

Image: https://twitter.com/igama/status/1822347578094043435/ (cropped)

@fak3r@mastodon.social (cropped)

https://mamot.fr/@fak3r@mastodon.social/112963252835869648

CC BY 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.pt

[buckleybltch]

Facts & Analysis: Hen Begins, Chimney Begins, Bobby Begins.

This analysis will primarily focus on Tommy during these episodes. This will objectively and impartially show facts of what happens during these episodes, and also my personal analysis.

From someone who has watched the show since season 4.

Large recap at the end!

Chimney Begins

Eli is very integrated into this episode. He is friendly with the other guys, but is also a guide for Chimney. He is the reason Chimney becomes a paramedic, but also advises Chimney on how to deal with the other guys.

Tommy: “Hey Eli, you forget to tip the delivery guy?”

Tommy is intentionally a jackass at the beginning of this episode as it’s meant to highlight the current workplace culture of the 118 under Captain Gerrard. Gerrard perpetuates and approves this kind of behaviour, and it’s how you get in his good books. Gerrard has very clearly made the 118 a white boys club.

Chimney: “You just don’t like me very much do you?”

Tommy: “If I thought about you at all, I probably wouldn’t.”

At this moment, Chimney is going through the hazing and comments from the others. No one is standing up for him, but Eli gives him some advice and explains why they’re acting the way they do. With regard to the other firefighters, we don’t see Sal at all, so the focus is on Tommy and Gerrard, and obviously Eli.

Eli: “it’s not personal you know. Look in this job, friends die, and funerals are held. They’re not going to just give you their friendship until you earn their respect. They’re not just protecting you, they’re protecting themselves.”

Here, Eli has witnessed the previous interaction with Chimney and Tommy, and explains it isn’t personal, but the other guys won’t just give Chimney their friendship. There’s nothing overt here that suggests Tommy has no interest in being friends with Chim due to his race, as Eli explains it is a trust issue with Chim being the new guy who has yet to prove himself.

Although Tommy “joking” that Chimney is an untipped delivery guy has some racist undertones, Eli states the hazing and comments comes from a place of no trust as he is the new guy. Tommy also only makes these comments in the presence of Gerrard, likely looking for his approval and appraisal; just trying to fit in. He is conforming socially and professionally, even in the negative ways. This will be explained more in the Hen Begins section, but this is likely because he is scared of losing his job if he openly goes against Gerrard and also, knowing what we know now, trying to remain safely in the closet. This doesn’t excuse his behaviour, and I’m not trying to, but it does begin to explain it. Anyone openly going against Gerrard would face severe consequences. When Tommy is not an instigator, he is a bystander and does let this behaviour continue (for now….).

Here, Tommy and the others are the perfect (and intentional) example of the workplace culture Gerrard has created.

On Chim’s first fire call, he’s sat next to Tommy in the engine who is constantly looking over at him. This is also the call where Kevin dies.

Chimney very suddenly understands Eli’s speech about friends dying and trust.

Chim then runs in after Tommy doesn’t respond to the radio and pulls him out of an exploding building, and waits in the hospital afterwards. Whether Chim knows it or not as he does it, this is him trying to prove himself and prove that he can be trusted by the other guys.

Eli visits Tommy in the hospital, evidenced by the visitor badge he wears and the update he gives Chim on his condition, indicating they are friends or friendly.

“Kevin died, Eli.”

“And Tommy didn’t, because of you.”

After Tommy’s stint in the hospital, he builds a bridge with Chimney and apologises.

It’s worth nothing that although he doesn’t explicitly say the words “I’m sorry”, I’ve always interpreted this scene as an apology, as Tommy and Chimney are seen as friendly afterwards. Chimney has proven that he can be trusted, and Tommy is finally extending his friendship (just as Eli told Chimney he would).

Tommy: “Love Actually, monster trucks, craft beer”

Chim: “So you’re back. How’s that head of yours?”

Tommy: “Still fat, but clearer. You saved my life. Thank you”

Tommy then shakes Chimney’s hand and brings him into a hug.

Chim: “Thanks Tommy”

This conversation references an encounter earlier in the episode where Chim asks to build a bridge with Tommy, and says whatever his thing is, he’ll make it his thing too, just so they can get along.

Tommy and Eli then stand with Chim, and then stand behind Chim, when he talks to the woman that Kevin saved. Eli and Tommy can be seen together watching the conversation Chim has, with Gerrard stood by the side of the fire truck.

Tommy: “paramedic, huh?”

Eli: “a damn good one.”

Notes on the framing of scenes:

- Eli is also sat with Tommy and Gerrard during scenes.

- Tommy and Eli walk alongside each other at Kevin’s funeral

- Tommy is behind Chim as he’s ringing the bell at Kevin’s funeral.

Although small framing, at this point I do think it’s intentional to show that Eli and Tommy will be his friends at the 118- they could have shown any other firefighters behind him and next to him. I believe it also shows that Eli is also a bystander, and he is a good friend of Chimney’s by season 5 (when we see the reunite in Boston), however he is also accepted by Gerrard.

We’ve intentionally been introduced to Tommy in this episode as a friend, as one of the episode afterwards has Chim calling Tommy for a favour. In this episode alone, Tommy has been shown to grow as a character and become friends with Chimney, although he does display negative behaviours.

Hen Begins

Tommy smiles and asks “who’s this” when Gerrard introduces them to Hen, and frowns when Gerrard calls her their “diversity hire”. He is no longer necessarily an instigator, but more of a bystander. Objectively, also not great, but no one publicly stands up for her, although we do see Chim stand up for her and give her advice in private.

Tommy, just like with Chimney, does not welcome Hen with open arms. He is still standoffish with her and makes jackass comments, although it is also worth nothing he does not say anything racist to her. Knowing what we know from Chimney Begins, Tommy (and the others) are likely waiting for Hen to prove herself, as Chim had to do, before they extend their friendship. With Gerrard barking in their ears that she won’t be able to as a woman, Hen had more to prove than Chimney and probably took more for the others to accept her.

Chim doesn’t stop to help her when they’re all piling their tools into a pile for cleaning. He too is conforming professionally, not wanting to risk his job and stepping out of line. At this time, Chimney has been at the 118 for some years and knows how to not piss Gerrard off, evidenced by the advice he gives to Hen.

Tommy does say “New york bitchiness is a compliment?” and Chimney calls him out for it. Whether Tommy thought Chimney was insulting her by saying she had an “east coast vibe to her” is debatable. Referring back to Tommy trying to conform to Gerrard and gain his approval, this comment might have also been in the same vein, although this isn’t explicitly said. Knowing that Tommy is aware in the future of how he acted under Gerrard, it wouldn’t be a stretch to also assume he knows it’s wrong at the time, but is more concerned with self preservation than standing up for Hen. Furthermore, knowing that Gerrard is like Tommy’s father, he is probably conditioned to fall in line, even if he knows it is wrong. Not excusing the behaviour, but it might explain why. Hindsight from season 7 can definitely change the way we now interpret some of the interactions in this episode, but absolutely does not take away from Tommy acting like a jackass.

Gerrard explains that he doesn’t like women in his firehouse because she won’t be able to pull the men out if they’re hurt and it puts them in jeopardy. This is a massive exaggeration on Eli’s speech in Chimney Begins where he says that people die, which is why theyre not friends with Chimney yet. Gerrard is the only one who says this, and none of the others are shown to agree with him. However, it did likely have some impact on their hesitancy to be friends with Hen at this time, although we do see this change.

Chimney says to Hen “oh you think they’re inviting the asian guy round to their houses for beers?” When they’re privately talking. Chim is to Hen what Eli was to Chim, a guide to the 118. This shows Chimney is still facing some negativity from the rest of the team, but he is no longer eating at a separate table and is friendly with them. He also faces the racism they suffer from Gerrard. It can be argued here that he doesn’t mean Tommy as those two are seen to be friendly, although this is ambiguous. It could also be argued that Tommy and Chimney are only friendly in private if Tommy is still trying to remain in Gerrard’s good books, although this is pure speculation. We don’t see any interaction between Tommy and Gerrard, so their relationship is up in the air.

Chim does talk to Hen privately but does notably not defend her in public.

After the car collision, Sal and Tommy build a bridge with Hen, saying if they’d had followed Gerrard they wouldn’t have found the patient in time and that Hen is good. This is the first time we hear them go against Gerrard. Furthermore, it shows the positive impact that Hen has had on the 118 and the boys. She has proven herself, and also proven that they don’t have to fit into Gerrard’s mould.

It’s after that collision that Gerrard is removed from the 118 and Hen discovers that people have been making complaints about Gerrard and compliments of Hen.

It is heavily implied that it is Chim, Tommy, and possibly Sal who are making these complaints and compliments as these are the only characters we are explicitly introduced to from the 118. However, Gerrard is still seen harassing her. The fact that the complaints began after Hen joined the 118 highlight the positive impact she had on the firehouse and the team. She fundamentally helped change the 118 for good and also aided in Tommy’s character development. Again, retrospectively, her speech probably had a large impact on him as a closeted gay man.

This happens an indeterminate time after she joins the 118, but it would be safe to assume it has been weeks if not months. Knowing this, it means that Tommy (and Sal) have been okay with her and have liked her for some time, evidenced by the fact they have been submitting complaints about Gerrard’s treatment of her for some time. Although we don’t see them being friends in the open, they are shown to have disagreed with Gerrard’s methods for some time and are on Hen’s side. Even though Hen didn’t know it at the time, they were standing up for her in private and trying to make the 118 a better place by ousting Gerrard, likely inspired by Hen.

It is further implied that, likely due to Gerrard’s constant threats of termination if someone disobeys his orders, Tommy, Sal, and even Chim are falling inline with Gerrard’s regime- they won’t go against him in fear of losing their jobs. This is classic self preservation, with Sal and Tommy falling in line socially as well as professionally. Admittedly, Tommy and Sal fall in line more than Chimney, but after Gerrard leaves, they’re seen being friends, with Tommy seen being close friends with Hen and Chim.

However, while they are seen falling in line professionally and socially at the fire house, in private they are friendly with Chimney and have been submitting complaints about Gerrard and compliments about Hen, indicating they are aware of the bad workplace culture and no longer want to be a part of it. This is a big step in Tommy’s change, and he is no longer a bystander, but actively working on making himself better and standing up for Hen. It took a while, and he could have done it sooner, but that does not distract from the fact he still did it.

Although he physically does not say the words “sorry” to Hen and Chim, in both begins episodes, he is seen building a bridge and apologising to them, and giving them a handshake/hug.

“You saved my life, thank you”

“You’re good”

This is further amplified in Bobby Begins.

As this has been a big topic with the return of Gerrard in season 8, I would like to state that both Eli and Chim advised, essentially, to not cause trouble, keep working, and keep their spirits up, and that is how you survive the 118. None of them, except Hen, explicitly stood up to Gerrard until the end.

Bobby Begins

Hen and Chim are obviously friendly with everyone as Hen is walking around placing bets with everyone. She banters with Tommy, who obviously feels comfortable asking for credit on a bet, and the four of them (Sal, Tommy, Hen, and Chim) end up in a conversation together. In this conversation, they’re all bantering and laughing together.

This is a MASSIVE shift from the beginning of Hen and Chim Begins- it explicitly shows Tommy, Sal, Hen, and Chim being friends now that Gerrard has gone, which further indicates that Gerrard was the source of the problem, not Tommy or Sal. Objectively, their actions and comments did not help and some were in poor taste.

However, there is 10 years between Chimney begins and Bobby begins, meaning Chimney and Tommy have been working together for 10 years, the majority of that without Gerrard. They have had plenty of time to work through any issues. Furthermore, Tommy (and Sal) were shown to acknowledge that Gerrard’s (and by proxy, their own) behaviour was wrong, and took steps to change that workplace culture.

In the fire truck in the montage of calls, Tommy and Chim are seen laughing together at Bobby’s lack of direction.

Sal is also prepped in this episode to show that he isn’t aligning with Bobby’s methods, primarily because he wants to be captain, whereas Tommy is just waiting to see that he can trust him. This is consistent for Tommy with the past two begins episodes; Eli says they wont be friends with Chimney until he’s earned their respect as friends die in this line of work and they need to trust each other. This, if you remember, is ultimately what led Tommy to be friends with Chimney, after Chim saved his life.

Sal is openly defiant against Bobby, stating he’s a “piece of work”. Tommy chastises Sal and Chimney is visibly displeased at Sal. Tommy, Hen, and Chim are all visibly unhappy with Sal and try to stop him when he goes for Bobby.

Tommy not yet trusting Bobby is primarily seen after Bobby transfers Sal. Believing that he fired Sal, Tommy is hesitant to like Bobby as he believes firing Sal was too harsh, with the same sentiment echoed by Chimney and Hen, until the truth is revealed.

Hen then invites Bobby out, saying “some of us are going out for drinks… join us”. We then see Chim, Tommy, and Hen out drinking together. This is when Hen reveals that Sal was transferred and Tommy is happy to accept Bobby. The four of them then sit drinking, talking, and laughing. They even show each other all their scars while laughing and getting drunk.

This scene in particular establishes them as friends who now do hang out outside of work, in contrast to Hen begins where Chimney says “you think they’re inviting the Asian guy to their houses to drink beer?”. The three of them are sticking together as friends. All of Tommy’s character development has led up to this point: he is no longer an instigator, no longer a bystander, but a friend. He stood up for them and stood by them, following them into changing the 118 and the horrid culture Gerrard had created. They trust each other and are friends here.

Tommy, Chim, Hen, and Bobby then sit at the top of the dinner table together at the station, once again smiling and talking.

Their friendship is once again showcased when Tommy transfers to the 217, and Hen and Chim surprise him with balloons and a cake.

Recap

Tommy in particular is a symbol of the impact Hen, Chimney, and Bobby had on the 118. He is the personification of the changes the 118 went through. From an oppressive boys club, to a friendly and trusting house. Tommy himself goes through massive change at the 118 thanks to Chim, Hen, and Bobby. Tommy is not the point of the Begins episodes, but he is a symbol of the change the 118 went through and I have always believed that is fully intentional- they show the change through this person.

As stated, we see them become a group of friends after Gerrard leaves. Tommy also becomes aware about how Gerrard influenced him. We see this in his conversation with Buck, where he states that Gerrard was like the father he already had and Gerrard did not make him a better person. He is obviously aware of the type of person he used to be and doesn’t attempt to hide it, evidenced by his conversation with Buck. It also cannot be assumed that any of the other characters dislike him or hold a grudge either due to his friendship with them in season 7.

Chimney even mentions Tommy in 3x16: Buck is troubled by the fact that Red has no friends and lost touch with the other firefighters from the 134. Eddie asks Hen and Chim if they’re still in contact with the other guys they used to work with.

Hen: “um, I don’t know if we’d call some of them friends”

Chim: “Yeah, I spoke with Tommy last year… I was calling to ask for a favour, but…”

Chim is referencing when he calls Tommy in season 2 (shortly after he is stabbed) to inform him of the Doheney Park (?) fire and asks if the still works at the 217… Tommy then flies over and dumps water on the fire, saving Eddie’s life.

Hen acknowledges here that they weren’t friends with all the guys who used to work at the 118, hinting at the poor treatment Hen and Chim faced, but Chim makes is clear with his statement that Tommy does not fall under this category. They might not be friends anymore, but they’re on good terms, good enough for Chim to still have his phone number in 2023, and good enough for Tommy to trust Chimney’s instincts twice and use ‘borrowed’ municipal equipment.

In season 8, we also see the 118 conforming (or in Buck’s case, struggling to conform) to Gerrard’s captaincy. They aren’t falling in line like they did in 2005, but they know not to cause any trouble and just say “yes sir”. They are also not publicly standing up for Buck when Gerrard berates him. To me, this is the biggest sign that they all know the best way to survive Gerrard is to say yes, keep your head down, and not cause trouble. This is likely what Tommy and Sal also had to do in 2005. Although they did take it a step further and make jackass comments, they were falling in line to protect themselves, just like Hen, Chim, and Eddie are doing in season 8, which they state in 8x01. They know now, just like they knew ~20 years ago, that standing up against Gerrard would have severe consequences.

No one is asking you to like how Tommy acts at the beginning of Hen and Chim begins: he is purposefully written as a jackass at the beginning to display the workplace environment Gerrard has created. However, it is objectively ignorant to continue on as if he has had no character development. It is intentionally written and shown that he fundamentally changed as a person thanks to Chimney and Hen, and Gerrard’s departure. By Bobby Begins, Tommy is ingrained with Hen and Chim and they are close friends. It is shown in both Chimney Begins and Hen Begins that he made up with them and became friends with them both. Those are scenes that are in the episode.

You don’t have to forgive him, but you have to acknowledge that the characters have. If we fast forward to season 7 and Tommy’s return, you’ll see:

Bobby saying that Tommy is good people and good for Buck.

Chimney saying that Tommy is so cool.

Hen smiling when Buck and Tommy arrived at Chimney’s hospital wedding.

Those are not the reactions of people disliking Tommy or holding a grudge.

I don’t like how he is written at the beginning of the begins episodes either, but I understand it is intentionally written that way, and that it is also intentionally written to show he has been forgiven and is now friends with everyone. That was half the point of the begins episodes- to show the positive impact that Hen, Chim, and Bobby had on the 118 and the other firefighters working there.

[mollywog]

Thinking about Katniss’s friendship with Madge (and also Gale)

I think Madge is important for several reasons, but one being: She shows us that Katniss doesn't 100% 'buy' the whole merchant vs seam thing.

The mayor’s daughter, Madge, opens the door. She’s in my year at school. Being the mayor’s daughter, you’d expect her to be a snob, but she’s all right. She just keeps to herself. Like me. Since neither of us really has a group of friends, we seem to end up together a lot at school. Eating lunch, sitting next to each other at assemblies, partnering for sports activities. We rarely talk, which suits us both just fine.

Katniss (and Gale) are actually progress thinkers in this way. They hold biases/resentment about the merchants, but also can recognize it as a Capital driven division.

Even though Gale snaps at Madge at the start of the book, Katniss credits him with knowing ‘his anger at Madge is misdirected.’ In fact he is the one verbalizing the idea to her.

You can see why someone like Madge, who has never been at risk of needing a tessera, can set him off. The chance of her name being drawn is very slim compared to those of us who live in the Seam. Not impossible, but slim. And even though the rules were set up by the Capitol, not the districts, certainly not Madge's family, it's hard not to resent those who don't have to sign up for tesserae.

Gale knows his anger at Madge is misdirected. On other days, deep in the woods, I've listened to him rant about how the tesserae are just another tool to cause misery in our district. A way to plant hatred between the starving workers of the Seam and those who can generally count on supper and thereby ensure we will never trust one another. "It's to the Capitol's advantage to have us divided among ourselves," he might say if there were no ears to hear but mine. If it wasn't reaping day. If a girl with a gold pin and no tesserae had not made what I'm sure she thought was a harmless comment.

Madge and Gale inspire Katniss’s rebellious actions just as much Peeta

Madge’s pin is what makes Rue trust Katniss.

I unclasp the pin and hold it out to her. “Here, you take it. It has more meaning for you than me.”

“Oh, no,” says Rue, closing my fingers back over the pin. “I like to see it on you. That’s how I decided I could trust you. Besides, I have this.” She pulls a necklace woven out of some kind of grass from her shirt. On it, hangs a roughly carved wooden star. Or maybe it’s a flower. “It’s a good luck charm.”

And Katniss is reminded of both Gale’s rants and Peeta’s piece in their games speech in the aftermath of Rue’s death

Gale’s voice is in my head. His ravings against the Capitol no longer pointless, no longer to be ignored. Rue’s death has forced me to confront my own fury against the cruelty, the injustice they inflict upon us. But here, even more strongly than at home, I feel my impotence. There’s no way to take revenge on the Capitol. Is there?

Then I remember Peeta’s words on the roof. “Only I keep wishing I could think of a way to . . . to show the Capitol they don’t own me. That I’m more than just a piece in their Games.” And for the first time, I understand what he means.

Please also check out this beautiful analysis of Madge by @wistfulweaverwoman!

[ghosts-and-glory]

Some Narinder character analysis for y’all.

This is a slightly re-edited excerpt from a much longer post of mine where I was specifically trying to provide a rebuttal to someone else. I’m kinda proud of some of my takes here and the write up took me hours so I’m gonna repost it here on its own.

I’m going into specifically into Narinder’s

Speech patterns and way of expressing emotions.

Implications of his post defeat dialogue

Relationship with Aym and Baal

Feelings on Ratau’s death

And a little extra on why do we “babygirl” Narinder

Full analysis under the cut.

The way Narinder expresses his positive feelings

First I gotta establish Narinder’s voice. Narinder seems almost incapable of giving a genuine compliment especially without turning it into something about himself.

Here’s three examples of him giving a complement to The Lamb. Taken from after defeating Amdusias and Shamura. He also complements The Lamb when you sacrifice Ratau but I’ll come back around to that.

I wanted to grab the entire quotes so it didn’t look like I was nitpicking.

"Very good, my vessel. It seems I chose well when I kept you from Death.”

First example, “very good,” is the complement, but immediately after he takes credit for this by calling you “my vessel” thereby claiming ownership over you. His vessel did well. And again “I chose well” doubled down and complemented himself.

“I admit, you have worn it (the red crown) almost as well as I could have myself.”

Again we see the complement layered in ego. “Almost as well as I” in other words you did well, but don’t forget I’m better. Also important to draw attention to is “I admit” this is a very explicit statement of his refusal to acknowledge the success of others.

"Your appetite for death is something I can admire, Vessel. But the Crown is mine, and none - NONE - are worthy. None other than I.”

Here he almost lays down a complement. “Your appetite for death is something I can admire” straight up, states his admiration. He seems to almost realize what he’s done and quickly pulls back into his ego, “But the crown is mine” “-none are worthy- None other than I.”

These are the three of the four ONLY times that Narinder ever says anything explicitly positive about someone else when he is a god. Thus establishing that the head ass cannot give out a compliment to save his life. The one time he gives you full credit for your actions he immediately pulls right back into his ego.

I cannot stress this enough. Someone who is characterized as cold and emotionally closed off as Narinder is WILL NOT suddenly undo this characteristic when they try and express a positive feeling.

Okay with that established we can look at his follower dialogue. Specifically these two examples from when you resurrect a follower and allow him to go on a mission.

“I cannot begrudge supplantation by one such as yourself.”

Literally saying I don’t resent you for taking my place. It’s not an explicit statement that he respects you but this is he weird fucked up little way of saying it. Of course he still lays it out in a way that’s self centred but we know from the way he has spoken that this is about as much verbal praise he is capable of giving.

The other one is a less explicit statement but I think it’s a interesting reflection of the final place of his character.

“…my thanks, Lamb.”

Being his last bit of unique dialogue, it’s an incredible ending to a character. He thanks you. That’s all he needed to say.

Narinder’s reaction to his defeat that he would rather die.

Let’s go over his dialogue in some depth.

"You weak, snivelling, foul thing. You - wait! Waaaiiiiiit!"

I’m starting with this line as it compels me the most. I find that there are two separate readings of this and I can’t really point to one above the other. On my play through I had assumed his wailing was more in reference to being denied death. It could also be read as him not wanting to be reduced to a follower and realizing what your mercy really means for his future.

“-are you to be a vengeful false idol, or a merciful coward? No longer can you blame your vile acts on me."

Okay, looking at the way he presents your two options he seems to push more for the murder action. “-vengeful false idol,” is how he refers to murder. It’s not exactly a glowing review but his use of the word vengeful is important. We know that one of Narinder’s main goals in the game is revenge, we he already acts with revenge I can’t say that he’s using this word as an insult. The false idol part of this statement seems like he’s attempted to separate himself from you, again for is ego.

Then he presents the spare option by calling you a “merciful coward.” The flow of this full sentence puts more pressure on this option. He presents it as the “or” the second option. This is the bad option, the option of a coward.

“So. vou are no different to me after all. You have become as I am."

I know this is a deranged order to go over these quotes but last we got murder. Compared to his spare dialogue this is incredibly sombre. We know from already establishing how big his ego is that saying you are the same as him is almost a compliment. I do find this dialogue incredibly interesting tho, I can’t exactly explain why but I can’t help but read this as damning as well. It’s like he means it in both ways, the ultimate fuck you. You are just as I am, for better and worse.

But from what we know about Narinder his edgy ass cannot express emotion. He wraps his statements in layers of irony and selfishness. Unless it supports the persona he puts on or inflates his ego he WILL NOT right out state his feelings or needs, especially when he was a chained god.

Relationship with Aym and Baal

Aym and Baal are incredibly hard to characterize. They don’t have much dialogue to work off of and only three characters every speak on them, Shamura, Narinder and Forneus. The context of the game does present them as more Narinder’s first (and second) hand, less followers more apprentices, almost, but where’s the fun in assuming.

"Intended as keepers, perhaps, but they were young and in need of guidance. Must I be blamed for my influence?"

I wanna draw attention to the specific wording of keepers. Again, based on the way Narinder speaks its safe to assume he means the formal meaning of a keeper, meaning a caretaker. It is unclear if Narinder was told they where his keepers or if he assumed so, but either way he still speaks on them as such.

For the sake of argument (and I don’t wanna rewrite this bit entirely) I’m gonna put the idea that Narinder brainwashed Aym and Baal against my presented idea of them being his keepers or apprentices.

The proposed idea of the brainwashing angle can be developed based on Narinder saying that “they where young and in need of guidance, must I be blamed for my influence.” This implies that, as much as Aym and Baal may have been sent as keepers, they where still young and Narinder could not help but be an influence on them. I am gonna come back around to this thread so hold onto this for a moment. Moving on.

“Two kits I did have, true love found! And yet one lackadaisy summer day, my beautiful children were taken away... a gift, they said, for the one they loved most, the one that waits...”

“Ooh, kits... I remember, I remember... two kits in my claws... a gift.."

It is unclear and morally dubious how Aym and Baal came to Narinder. First we’re not 100% where Narinder is chained. The wiki lists it as the afterlife and in dialogue Narinder refers to it as “at the gates between this life and the next, trapped at the nexus of what was and what wasn't.” (When he asks you to send him on a mission.) We can travel there both by dying and being summoned there by him.

Either way the assumption is that Aym and Baal had to die. (As an aside I have my own speculation on the conditions required for a person to be presented to Narinder or to be resurrected but that’s off topic.) The horrific implications being that either Shamura themself killed the kits or that they where already dying. However you cannot blame the reaper for ushering the dead away from life.

I’m going to work off of the cult specific definition and characteristics of brainwashing. It’s hard to characterize where Aym and Baal sit here as, again they have little dialogue and due to the nature of brainwashing it’s hard to spot. First I wanna grab my brainwashing resources.

I’m using Encyclopedia Britannica’s page on brainwashing, cults, indoctrination, manipulation as my primary resourse.

Again I kinda wanna apply a layer of irony to how literally I apply real life tragedy to this game that obviously uses cults in a comedic manner. I wanna focus in on the characteristics displayed by victims of brainwashing and the techniques used in brainwashing by an abuser.

Looking at the elements used in brainwashing the only one I can say off the bat that is present is isolation, obviously. But with that let’s grab all of Aym and Baal’s dialogue.

What is clear from their dialogue is their obedience to Narinder. They call him master while his keepers and still when you meet them later when adventuring. And physically we do see them by Narinder’s side the entire main game and they fight the Lamb first. But if we add some nuance and look at their role as keepers or my own theory of being apprentices both actions of obedience make sense still for those roles. On the same note they also don’t display traits you would expect for someone fully under Narinder’s control. They speak to the Lamb out of turn and attack without prompting from Narinder.

Other characteristics are hard to imply. With torture I do want to pass it off an unlikely as based on the way Narinder tries to manipulate the Lamb it’s only verbal and he cannot attack while chained and I don’t see that changing with the keepers. Traits like sleep, water and food deprivation can’t be applied for various reasons (mostly the being dead one) and we don’t know anything about Narinder and the keeper’s interactions in the past so I’ll have to disregard other traits like suggestion.

Baal: "It's you. Usurper of the Red Crown. The one who freed us."

Aym: "Ha! You are nothing compared to our Master. We have not been in this world long, but already I can tell you are weak. You lack discipline. Our Master wielded Death with precision and control. You allow chaos to reign."

Baal: "What my brother means to say is thank you."

Moving onto groupthink I can pretty comfortably say that this is not a present characteristic of Aym and Baal. In their limited dialogue we can easily characterize Aym as more outwardly defensive of Narinder but Baal is more reserved and even contradicts Aym and is able to speak freely of Narinder.

Looping back around to the way Narinder speaks on his influence on Aym and Baal. Again we know how Narinder speaks, he cannot give honest compliments and dodges affection like it’s a professional sport. With the way he will outright tell the Lamb to manipulate followers and then uses the words “guidance” and “influence” about Aym and Baal, he has to be avoiding admitting affection to the keepers. He does follow that up with “Do what you wish, scornful God. I care not for them.” But again does Forneus not also allow her kits to do as they wish?

My own reading of Narinder’s relation to Aym and Baal is that of mentorship but it could also be read as parental. But saying brainwashed is a big stretch.

His feelings on the death of Ratau

This is like another example of like, yeah, wow, an evil character does evil? Who could’ve possibly foreseen this? Sarcasm aside I do see his comments on this being a lesser evil.

First I do have to ask why, if Narinder held strong sense of unrest against his former vessel, did he not have him struck down? The main reason I can see is that Ratau is still devoted to the red crown, most clearly seen by the statue at the lonely shack which generates devotion.

Second, Ratau’s death isn’t on his hands, it’s on yours. I find his pride here is from The Lamb’s actions not the death of Ratau. You killed your mentor, he describes your actions as “treacherous opportunism” and says “A great Vessel takes their master's will as their own.” Based on his later dialogue this is likely more foreshadowing the Lamb becoming as Narinder is. Narinder tried to kill his siblings, and you did kill your mentor. “You have become as I am."

I’m gonna tangent quickly cause there’s a line here that is incredibly interesting.

"He renounced his position after striking a bargain that resulted in the sacrifice of a Follower. He was weak."

Incredibly interesting the way he condemns Ratau’s sacrifice of a follower. Narinder directly contradicts himself. It is implied that the follower was lost to another being that did not benefit Narinder, but the Lamb also sacrifices followers to the Fox and Midas. Just something to chew on.

Why do we “babygirl” Narinder and other evil characters?

This is kinda the last bit I’m gonna get into before I cap this off. It is incredibly funny for me to say “I babygirl Narinder” only to get a reply that’s like “I don’t think you babygirl him on purpose.” But I wanna talk about why this happens and why it happened to specifically Narinder.

When people complain about the fandom interpretation of Narinder I think they forget the tone of cult of the lamb. The closest thing I could think to call it would be a dark comedy kinda energy.

The game has very dark themes going on. Mentions of real horrible things like genocide, cults and religious abuse. But also just like look at the game, it’s visual style is so cute and non threatening, the bird characters have two mouths to commit to the bit. If you look at the way it depicts cults it’s very surface level, it’s more focused on being a satire on the common satanic media kinda look of a cult. Visually it bathes in its aesthetics, taking names from books like The Lessee Key of Solomon, uses villainous depictions of symbols like the pentagram or old Hebrew script, disregarding its nuanced origins.

And then they go onto do the funniest thing ever. The other bishop’s? Gross little freaks, based on commonly disliked animals, worm, frog, squid and spider. And then- and then they make the god of death, who they characterize and manipulative and evil, they make him a catboy. You cannot tell me they did not know what they where doing.

Why have I shot Narinder with the babygirl beam? CAUSE THE GAME DID IT FIRST!

I’m gonna call the god of death my little meow meow and point out his status as a Tumblr sexy man cause he’s a little guy and I wanna give him head scritches. But I’m also gonna call him a layered, fucked up and an incredibly interesting character in the same breath.

[flashyfools]

months ago, while mindlessly scrolling through twitter, i came across an analysis of this particular panel from chapter 434 (i can’t remember who wrote the thread, i’m so sorry </3), and i really want to talk about it too.

(EDIT: original author of the thread is @goingbuggy!!! go check out their metas, they're amazing)

the thread was focusing on the way the speech bubble covers shanks's scar completely, and how it can be seen as a sign of vulnerability. oda is using shanks’s own words to hide his suffering, letting his physical scars be representative of his emotional ones, even though the event he’s talking about is completely unrelated to the way he got his scar.

in fact, we know shanks is not ashamed of the scar, since just a couple of pages after this one he mentions it directly as a way to start the conversation about blackbeard:

he doesn’t have a problem with the marking itself, it’s just used as a narrative device, a tool to highlight (in an extradiegetic way) his emotional wounds and the pain he always tries so hard to hide, in an effort to keep his usual composure.

the original author of the thread compared the panel from chapter 434 to another, way older one, from the very first chapter:

this takes place right after shanks loses his left arm to save luffy’s life. it’s obviously a very emotionally charged moment, which means the best thing to do would be showing a close-up of shanks’s reaction to everything that’s unfolding in front of him at that moment (luffy’s cries, or even his own reaction to his sacrifice). oda, however, chooses not to do that; instead, he hides half of shanks’s face, just like he did in chapter 434. the way the moment is portrayed tells the reader shanks is willing to hide his pain in an even deeper way than what he’s showing by smiling at luffy right after getting his arm chopped off.

it’s a great way to explain an important characteristic without stating it right away. it's a focal point of shanks's character: it's his way of showing luffy he cares about him and would much rather hide his suffering than pass it onto him, but it's also oda's way of conveying that shanks is much more vulnerable than what he allows himself to show.

having said that, the reason oda chose to bring back this framing in chapter 434 appears obvious: shanks misses buggy.

it’s plain to see, especially if we look at the whole page.

shanks tries so hard to act collected when talking about buggy, but it’s obvious that he’s hurting. his wording makes it clear he’s trying to detach from him (“that’s the end of it” + “rumors have it”); he acts like buggy doesn’t exist in his thoughts anymore, when it’s obvious he still does. he feels remorse, he regrets letting buggy go. he’s scared he might have been in the wrong. he knows he hurt buggy, but he desperately wishes he didn’t.

all of this weighs on him in a way he isn’t used to, so he locks these feelings up, thinking of them only in relation to something that happened in the past, and as so, stays in the past. he smiles while talking about him and buggy, but it’s a remorseful smile. he cuts the conversation short even though he vividly remembers what happened between them, and as he does so, his words hide the scar. he desperately tries to patch things up in his mind by exclusively clinging onto the good memories they share, but the remorse always creeps up on him. he always smiles when talking about buggy, even when he’s talking directly to him. but his smile always ends up looking sour.

this is exactly why i hate it when people say shanks doesn’t care about buggy. oda wouldn’t have given these panels so much depth if he didn’t want to show just how much shanks actually cares. even just the fact the panel we are focusing on directly mirrors a panel from the first chapter, one so important and impactful, should tell you everything you need to know.

buggy will always be shanks’s weakness. caring so much about someone when you’re a pirate of that caliber is difficult in itself, even more so when that someone is so far away from you now.

[bkdk-bylerthings]

A Complete Analysis Series of Finn Wolfhard’s STurn Playlist

Having Byler doubt? Read My Analysis!

I think it’s really important to take these songs as strong solid evidence for Byler considering Mike’s actor Finn, made this playlist for ST5

Preview Brief/Intro: I will be doing One Song at a time (one each post), I will be going in order on Finn’s playlist. This is all my ideas and interpretations of what I think each song represents and tells us. I will try to post each as soon as I can. With that pls have fun reading my analysis.

1st Song we will discuss:

Starter Notes/Thoughts: As I’m listening to the first song I feel like this song goes in order from when Mike arrives in California to the end of season 4. Also this whole song is in Mike’s POV

Key: Italicized - Lyric | Normal - Analysis

No one saw, nothin' at all

‘No one saw’ how we was being hella awkward with Will at the airport (I mean they did see but Not to Mike’s pov, he was probably thinking: they saw nothing, stay calm)

No law was there to fight

I’m thinking this could mean ‘the law’ being like ‘liking boys is bad/homo is a sin’ but now that he’s in California there is no law to fight bc he’s out of Hawkins (a town that is not so gay friendly), so basically his feelings for Will are so much more obvious

All dressed down

This just refers to what he was wearing at the airport and how he was caught lacking trying to fit in, trying to be normal…not gay…But! His mask is slipping remember bc he’s in California where there’s no law that being gay is a sin, he’s just used to Hawkins law (law is just used as metaphor here)

Walkin' out in the California night

Literally mentions California, he’s in California, and as he’s walking out to California- (ignore the night part) he’s walking out of the airport to California. And as he’s walking he’s trying not too look at Will and bearly talking to him—he thinks the next lines:

"Hey kid come along, something is wrong

I believe you know

^ voice inside Mike’s head being like: Ik ur upset AND ik you know why. This is such a good line to represent Mike’s internalized homophobia, the line basically saying: Ik something’s wrong, it’s the fact that you like… but he can’t really admit that he likes Will yet, bc that line is his inner voice pushing him to actually accept it. He probably heavily thinks this at rink-o-maina too.

All this to say

Only one way that this can go"

Cont. with his inner voice—So ‘all this to say’ stating what was said in the previous lines, like defining it, making it important. Then, the only one way that this could go…that being accepting his feelings for Will!

"Come on with us for a ride

Step on inside the long black car

show you the meaning of hell

‘Hell’ is important bc ppl think if ur gay u go to Hell.. Then what it’s actually saying: the journey of Mike Wheeler going on this long road trip with Will to get El, and it will be like Hell trying to figure out his feelings and the struggles and challenges that actually arise in the show, also him trying to figure out what Will meant in his speech in the van.

Boy, just let me tell you, that's where you are"

Basically just a reference to being gay is a sin and he’s already in Hell for liking Will

My heart won't beat

'Til we meet again together

Oh, don't cry

Keep me on your mind forever

These 4 lines are when Will gives his speech to Mike.

1st 2 lines: is like Will’s convincing Mike that El needs him and him trying to fix their relationship, so Mike thinks his heart won’t beat till he see El again- but this just him faking it to make it and bc he’ll do anything Will tells him too 💀

2nd 2 lines: Mike knows that Will was crying in the van, he doesn’t want to lose Will, so he wants Will to keep him in his mind forever

I found a new song, pulls me along

To that other plane

I'll see you some time

Off down the line

Where it never rains

Honestly I’m not as confident in these lines’ analysis’ as I was in my other ones so just keep that in mind:

I think this is after that interaction when he reunites with El and does that look scene between her & Will and he realizes then that his heart never stopped beating but it did stop when Will was smiling at El and not him.

These lines are him moving on from El

The last line: ‘where it never rains’, I want to believe this is about him not wanting to get into any more fights with Will bc Mike associates the Rain with fighting with Will

I put my foot in the gas tank

For the last time I know

For the last time he knows, finally that he has accepted his feelings now for Will

I'll be right by your side

From Paradise to El Paso

Reference to when Mike says to Will we’ll defeat him together in the last Ep of ST4

Also reference of when they were traveling— hence ‘side by side’— to go get El

Ending Notes/Thoughts: See how it went in order through the whole of season 4 in Mike’s POV, I just think that’s really cool. Finn sure did know what he was doing with this playlist that’s for sure lol

Finn’s Playlist:

Thank you for reading,

- Stasia ♡

[vanpalmersgf]

Is it just me or does the BuckTommy breakup and aftermath just seem like it’s setting up for Buck & Tommy to get back together???

Like Tommy’s reasoning for breaking up pretty much being that even though he likes and wants to be with Buck, he’s not good enough for Buck/Buck should discover himself more/however you interpreted it. In the land of procedural television, this is very rarely enough cause for a permanent break up, usually after some speech like that happens, the couple go their separate ways, find themselves a little and then come back to each other.

Also, the amount of talking and moping about Tommy that Buck has been doing since they broke up is cause for me to think this. I feel like it’s unusual for 911 to focus on breakups for long after the couple parts, they usually just push the partner out of the show and act like they were never there. They didn’t even focus on Tommy/BuckTommy enough to justify the dragging out of this breakup.

Also, the Halloween episode, specifically the scene at the cemetery and the speech Buck gives, seems to hint that Buck really wants Tommy in his life. To immediate break up the next episode makes it appear like Tommy got insecure and that’s why he broke it off, because he doesn’t want Buck to fall in love and then get disappointed. It seems like Buck knows this and that he isn’t the type of person to accept this reason enough to break up, especially not with Tommy, who he seemed to truly like and see a future with (but that’s just my personal character analysis.)

But on the other hand, Lou made it clear in the post 8x06 interview he did that he was dropped from the show out of nowhere BUT is open to coming back. I don’t know why they would boot him and not tell him if he was planned to come back if he is supposed to return.

Note: I’m not saying i think they’re gonna get back together, I’m just saying it’s not written like it’s a finite ending, whether intentional or not

[roseofthewind]

Furina and High-Masking Autism

A lot of people don’t know how to recognize high-masking autism because its presentation challenges many stereotypes about what autistic people are like, but Furina continues to be a perfect example of it.

It should go without saying, but I love Furina as a character and this analysis is in no way putting her down. Autism is an entirely neutral trait that carries through to adulthood, and if you have a strong negative reaction to the idea of a character you like being autistic, you have probably absorbed a lot of misconceptions about autism and have some unconscious prejudice to unpack.

In the paragraphs that follow, I am going to explain several autistic traits and give examples of how Furina displays each trait.

*thinking face on*

1. Autism is, at its core, a difference in the way the brain takes in, processes, and shares information. This can make it challenging to communicate with other people who don’t share this neurotype, but a high-masking autistic person has observed the way other people interact and spent years copying them, figuring out through trial and error how to act to best fit in and get the most positive responses from other people.

Furina’s ascension speech in Act V of the Fontaine Archon Quest, where she first presents herself to the people of Fontaine, is a great example of this observation of others with the goal of masking as well as possible. Furina initially gives the speech as comes naturally to her in a very straightforward and honest manner (also an autistic trait!). After the speech, she realizes that her citizens are responding with hostility to her humility and lack of authoritarianism, so she then plays off the original speech as a ruse and immediately redoes the entire thing more assertively according to the feedback she picked up on.

(Calm down, Furina… Think. Think. What do the people want? How would they imagine a god to speak and act?)

Fontaine AQ Act V, Chinese audio: (link starts video at 3:10:07) https://youtu.be/T-AbXi5bufk?si=eQADAWw6n8Sk0PZE&t=11407

This is the kind of social trial and error that many autistic people do over the course of years so that eventually we can say the “right thing” the first time around, and it’s a testimony to Furina’s skills as an actor that she course-corrects so quickly.

Because of all the constant mental calculations, social situations are usually very tiring for autistic people, even when the social event lines up with their interests. In Clorinde’s Story Quest, Furina has no interest in Navia’s suggestion of pulling an all-nighter to keep playing D&D (I mean, Tabletop Troupe!) and wants to go home and rest.

Furina: Huh!? Oh, um… I’m not sure I’ll have enough energy for that…

Furina has shown other signs of needing to take a break from socializing– for instance, in Lynette’s hangout event quest, Lynette gets tired of all the people at her post-performance reception and goes upstairs to a quieter room to find Furina already there.

Furina offers to give Lynette tips on the best ways to slip away from an event, and Lynette misunderstands at first and isn’t interested in Furina’s advice because she thinks Furina loves everything about the spotlight and doesn’t realize how much they have in common. This goes a long way to show just how well Furina masks her autistic traits!

Furina: I see you’ve escaped the crowds to seek refuge on the second floor. Fame can be overwhelming at first, can’t it? Perhaps you’d benefit from hearing about the experiences of a veteran celebrity such as myself?

Lynette: No thanks, I’m good. Pretty sure this’ll be my first and last time in this situation…

Furina: Hey, at least let me finish! I have top tips on dealing with belligerent reporters, slipping away to hunt down snacks during the intermission…

Lynette: …Tell me everything.

Conversely, when alone, Furina will stay up late reading or doing something else that interests her and will not feel the same need to stop and rest, because when alone, there is no need to expend extra energy worrying about socializing properly.

At the beginning of the Fontinalia Film Festival limited event story, Traveler and Paimon go to Furina’s apartment and she answers the door sounding a bit groggy.

Paimon: Did you just get up, Furina? It’s already past noon, you know…

After Traveler chastises Paimon for being rude, Paimon panics and says something nonsensical about how the weather is so nice in the afternoon and sleeping in is fine, actually, and Furina responds that she’s just a bit tired because she was up late reading:

Furina: I was just up late last night reading some novels…

When focused on an interest, it’s very easy for an autistic person to lose track of time and it can be difficult to break out of the focused state and go to bed. (This is a trait that overlaps significantly with ADHD.)

2. Alexithymia is a difficulty with identifying, processing, and expressing your own emotions, and in extreme cases presents as an almost total lack of emotion. Some degree of alexithymia is common in autistic people.

I believe, in the flashback scene below from Act V of the Fontaine Archon Quest, that Furina genuinely did not realize she was upset and did not realize she was crying, which could be explained by alexithymia.

Fontainian citizen: Are… are you crying?

(If you played this part with the English voice acting and interpreted it differently, try listening to it in Chinese- Furina’s voice sounds completely confident and in control the entire time, and it’s not until the other person points out she’s crying that Furina sounds at all upset.)

Fontaine AQ Act V, Chinese audio: (link starts video at 3:22:00) https://youtu.be/T-AbXi5bufk?si=fl8xSwkQ0rRLFPQU&t=12121

I am a believer that Furina and Focalors were originally the same person, and Focalors is just Furina’s divinity and pre-archonhood memories— so if Furina is autistic, Focalors is autistic.

While talking to Neuvillette, Focalors is extremely matter-of-fact with her explanation of her plan, very matter-of-fact about the suffering of her own human self, and very matter-of-fact about her own impending death. There is no show of emotion— she just tells Neuvillette the facts. This could be related to alexithymia, but regardless it is a very autistic way of communicating that is often misinterpreted as cold and uncaring. In actuality, someone who is willing to sacrifice their own immortality, divine power, and freedom to save other people’s lives cares a great deal, even if the tone of their voice doesn’t reflect it!

Focalors: I mean, did you think I would be the sort to enjoy peaceful repose while Furina suffered?

3. The autistic nervous system takes in a lot of information that a neurotypical person’s would filter out as not being important enough to bother with- this is why autistic people are so much more sensitive to sounds, lights, textures, and any changes in the environment. Too much sensory input can actually feel painful.

There is a documented instance of the Opera Epiclese becoming so loud that Furina was overstimulated enough to yell at everyone to be quiet.

Furthermore, post-Archon Quest, after moving out of the Palais Mermonia and into her own apartment, Furina eats primarily macaroni for an unspecified amount of time— weeks or months on end. After a huge life change, it’s common for an autistic person to want anything they can control to be the same, so their brain has more space to process everything that’s different.

There is no neurotypical explanation for eating the same food over and over to the exclusion of everything else. It makes no sense to someone who doesn’t experience overstimulation and distress at too much change. Case in point, during Furina’s Story Quest, Traveler and Paimon are rather baffled:

Traveler: …Don’t you get sick of macaroni every day?

Furina: Not at all. As long as you have different kinds of sauces in, you can have macaroni and tomato sauce one week, macaroni and bolognese the next…

Notice that Furina says “macaroni and tomato sauce one week,” implying that she’s fine with just that sauce for an entire week, and then uses a different sauce for the next entire week. Still not very much variety!

Paimon: Oh, sounds like you’re really struggling to cope… Traveler: Is it because you have to do all your own cooking now?

Yes, Furina is struggling to cope, but not because she’s incapable of learning how to cook more complex dishes! She’s just too burnt out to want to make or eat a variety of things right now. Furina explains this and Paimon doesn’t believe her, but since we know that Furina’s special dish is an even more extravagant version of La Lettre a Focalors, if Furina is capable of baking at that level, she would certainly be capable of cooking.

4. Stimming, or self-stimulatory behaviors, are repetitive actions that serve to regulate or soothe the nervous system. There are countless behaviors that can be used as stims, but some common ones are rocking back and forth, hand flapping or waving, leg bouncing, skin picking or scratching, rubbing or squeezing a comforting object, dancing, spinning in circles, humming or vocalizing, or listening to the same song on repeat for hours. (It’s worth noting that stimming is not exclusive to autism— especially when stressed neurotypical people do some of these things too. Stimming can also be commonly exhibited by people with ADHD who aren’t autistic, although there are also a significant number of people with both ADHD and autism.)

One of Furina’s idle animations and also her normal attack sequence include behaviors that can be interpreted as stimming. Furina’s idle animation with Surintendante Chevalmarin involves her holding the seahorse up, waving her around, squeezing her tightly and rubbing her face on her head. Chevalmarin is made entirely of water and loves Furina dearly, and so does not mind being cuddled like a stuffed animal.

If you use all four of Furina’s normal attacks, she spins around several times and the final attack culminates with her spinning on a bubble and swinging her sword for AOE. If you use just three of Furina’s normal attacks and do not append any additional actions, Furina spins around again before plunging the tip of her sword into the ground (I do not have a gif of this). Furina also spins around when added to your 4-character party. That’s a lot of spinning, which certainly makes it seem like a preferred stim!

5. I got this far without mentioning special interests because I have so much other evidence that I hardly need to bring it up— but since it’s a much more commonly recognized autistic trait than many of the things I discussed at the beginning, I will include this part of Furina’s teapot dialogue, which does indicate that Furina engages in special interests:

Furina pretty much defines “special interest” with the above statement: it’s something that you’re interested in (to the point that it may feel like an obsession) and you have to know everything about it!

These are just a few examples of autistic traits that Furina exhibits— there are absolutely more. Furina is shown many times to have a high level of near constant anxiety despite being someone who is confident enough to perform on stage. This anxiety could come from other sources, like c-PTSD, but it’s very common for a high-masking autistic person to have chronic anxiety from being hyper-aware of avoiding potential social blunders, repressing stimming to appear more “normal,” and dealing with the increased risk of overstimulation that comes with repressing stimming.

If you made it this far, thanks for reading! Even if you don’t agree with my interpretation of the character, I do genuinely hope you learned something about autism.

[magicwhiskers29]

“You don’t always have to be the Hero!”

“It doesn’t always need to be you!”

As I understand, this line has been thrown around a bit because, well, it’s just a really good line, for any situation it can fit for. It’s impactful, the voice work on the original is really good, and it summarises a lot of LMK season 5’s core themes really well! Heck, it probably summarises a lot of themes really well, but I think there’s something interesting to be found in the fact that it’s Macaque saying it, originally.

Let’s roll back a second to Shadow Play, s2e7, because I think that can really recontextualise it.

“The Hero and the Warrior were like the sun and moon, their light a protective glow, shining upon the world.”

“Together, there was nothing that could stop the two of them, in either the Celestial Realms, or on Earth.”

“As time went on, the Hero gained power beyond comprehension.”

“As his light grew, so too did his shadow, and soon, the Warrior was cast in that shadow.”

“In the darkness, the Warrior was forgotten by the Hero.”

…okay, so I’m pretty sure a good half of the fanbase already has this monologue memorised, but I digress. Because the loaded meaning behind the words “Hero” and “Warrior” are never forgotten by the show. If we cut ahead to Embrace Your Destiny, the s3 special, we get a direct reference to these titles in a practical setting.

“I’m not a Hero, bud.”

“Then be a Warrior!”

This is the moment which really kickstarts Macaque’s turn to start working with the Monkie Kids. He doesn’t work against them again, after this point! (As of season 5) MK tells him that to do good things, and save the world, he doesn’t have to be the Hero in limelight – he can be the Warrior, doing good from the shadows. And for as much as Macaque does take quite a prominent role in the fight after this, literally taking on Wukong 1v1, it’s still MK who ends up with the glory, in the end.

Macaque needed to hear this because he does these antagonistic things out of self-preservation, yes, but also out of a spite which he knows isn’t especially heroic. And because he doesn’t want to be the guy who leaves stuff behind. But after this, he doesn’t act as an antagonist again, and he does stuff which he really doesn’t want to do, like confronting his past with Wukong in the scroll, in the season 4 special! What MK says sticks with him.

And to get it out of the way, not every time the word “Hero” is used in the show is necessarily a reference to the Hero and Warrior. For instance, when Mei yells at a possessed Wukong and LBD in the season 3 special, she says “Because that’s the hard part of being a hero!”, but I don’t think she’s talking about the implications of limelight, or Wukong and Macaque’s story. I mean, she never even saw the play in Shadow Play, so she likely doesn’t even know the deeper meaning behind that word...

A lot of these other moments can carry interesting implications when examined through that lens (E.G. how Mei fits into the Hero-Warrior dynamic, or the nature of LBD’s “Save your hero speech, child” from the end of season 3) but I think those would better be left for a different analysis.

These two lines from season 5, at the beginning of this post, have a direct connection to the Hero-Warrior stuff though, because they're from the character who invented that metaphor, to the only other character who understands it. It’s like a coded message, I suppose.

Throughout a lot of Macaque’s screen time, especially in the earlier seasons, he preaches about self-preservation, specifically under the advice of “look out for number one”. He believes that people like him, and later MK, need to be the ones to look out for themselves, because otherwise, no one will. This is expanded upon to seem a little more heroic and noble in later seasons, to be similar to a sentiment that Wukong expresses about choosing your own destiny, and forging your own path. The core of the advice is still centred on trusting yourself, and prioritising your own beliefs, but it’s no longer about something that could be perceived as selfish, and more a tool to use for good.

Macaque is shown to want MK to look out for himself less selflessly. His advice in season 4 is this choosing your own destiny stuff, but it also mirrors the end of season 5 really well. He tells MK that the two choices of fighting Azure, or not fighting Azure don’t have to be the only choices. If MK goes to fight Azure as is, he will lose, and there is a good chance that he will die. Like, obviously Macaque doesn’t want the whole universe that he lives in to be destroyed, but he’s also not yet fighting for it, at this point. He does want MK to do what is most likely to save everyone, but the reason he pulled MK aside was to appeal to him to take care of himself.

Season 5 already mirrors and is a true continuation of season 4 in a lot of ways, with the main threat once again being the sky cracks that symbolise the end of the world due to the death of the Jade Emperor, but it’s thematically that we can really see that. Macaque even literally brings up that MK is misconstruing his advice from the previous season in the line right before the ones I’m supposed (haha, we're getting there) to be analysing.

Once again, MK has two choices, functionally: save the world at the cost of himself, or do nothing. Once again, Macaque is advocating for MK to make a third choice, one where the world can be saved without MK likely dying in the process, but MK had taken the whole “choose your own destiny thing” to be choosing the choice that only he can. Macaque’s biggest argument to this are these two lines. That MK doesn’t need to be the Hero, this time, or any time.

The Hero exists a public figure that people can rely on. He represents absolute power, as well as recklessness. In Macaque’s story, the Hero gains power, and then leaves his friend behind, so he’s strong, but doesn’t stop to think about consequences. Now, obviously Macaque is very biased in his story, because we know Wukong very clearly does still care about Macaque, but to what the story represents between MK and Macaque, that’s not necessarily important.

Macaque is just telling MK that he doesn’t need to be someone who’s the public picture of heroism. He has all of this power, but it’s his choice how to use it. Sometimes, it’s okay to take a backseat and be a Warrior, someone who can look out for themself, and who doesn’t always have to do everything themself. Once, the Hero and the Warrior were ultimate power together. The fact that the Hero became that by himself suggests that he still does the job he once did – he just doesn’t need to have anyone help him with it.

The Hero is supposed to be presented as a selfish figure, but that can also flip around to be someone who’s selfless, so selfless that they try to carry the weight of a good mission on their shoulders alone. The Hero’s sin was abandoning the Warrior, not unspeakable evil or something. And… Isn’t that sort of what MK is doing here? He’s trying to an act so selfless that it really could only be called heroic, but to the friends he’s leaving behind to make a sacrifice that’s really a not-so-subtly-disguised suicide allegory, it’s selfish. He abandons them all to fulfil his supposed destiny, but they don’t need him to sacrifice himself – they want to find another way with him.

If you want to look at it that way, MK is playing out the story again. Seems fitting, when later in the same episode, Wukong, the original Hero, tries to take his place and make the same sacrifice.

Macaque’s statement to MK is so loaded because of his history as the original Warrior, and what being a hero really means to him, and across the show with MK’s actions as a whole. He doesn’t need to always be the Hero – sometimes it’s okay to just be a Warrior. And it doesn’t always need to be him – just like the original Hero, there are people who would want to help him, if he just doesn’t leave them behind.

[blasphemousclaw]

tanith for the character list thing?

MY GIRLLLL

• favorite thing about them

I love how she occupies this position of power as the proprietress of the Manor, the consort of a demigod, and she’s the sole person in charge of operating their cult movement (since Rykard doesn’t seem to do much except kill eat and sleep these days) and yet she comes from such a humble background as a dancer from a foreign land… she projects this image of ruthlessness and strength, but she actually has really deep insecurities about herself that start to come out during Rya’s quest? her greatest fear is that she’s always been weak, and that Rykard always knew that… I think she clings to the entire structure she’s built up at the Manor because she’s afraid of feeling powerless, maybe because she felt powerless in her past? also her mask is sexy

• least favorite thing about them

I just wish she had more content! the dlc introduced the Dancer of Ranah with almost an identical face to Tanith, which implies Tanith was the same kind of Dancer? was she actually an expert swordswoman who gave up the lifestyle to run a cult with a demigod? I NEED TO KNOW

• favorite line

“Dear Rykard, please find purchase within me, I wish to be your serpent; your family.” eating your beloved’s corpse is what true love looks like <3

also it’s super long but her speech about the Volcano Manor’s goals is really good; you can tell she’s tailored her and Rykard’s goals to appeal to the Tarnished and get them fired up against the Erdtree… queen of public speaking

• brOTP

her relationship with Rya is so sweet and also so emotionally complicated, like they love each other so much but Tanith lies to her about the truth of Volcano Manor and the circumstances of her birth and shatters that trust… :(

I also feel like Tanith would’ve had a great dynamic with Bernahl?? there’s this implication that he’s her most trusted Recusant; he never got eaten by Rykard even though Tanith feeds all the greatest champions to him, and Bernahl seems to know everything about Rykard and his mission after we kill him… and there’s also the fact that he uses a really important weapon to the serpent cult, and it’s implied that he goes to Farum Azula to challenge Maliketh, which was seemingly what Rykard was originally gonna do? so Bernahl and Tanith must have shared their plans and secrets with each other… I wonder if he was the “precocious” guest Tanith mentions having long ago whom we remind her of if we show up to the Manor unannounced?

• ОТР

TANITH/RYKARD. OBVIOUSLY. I won’t write a whole paragraph about them because I already talked about their relationship here

• nОТР

Patches LOL I know he’s trying to keep Tanith from destroying herself and remind her that she has other things in life to live for but what if I WANT her to destroy herself because of her undying love for her serpent god husband who’s prophesied to devour the entire world! like what’s sexier than this!! STAY OUT OF THIS PATCHES

• random headcanon

she braids Rya’s hair to match her own hairstyle :,)

• unpopular opinion

I’m never going to police the kind of content people want to make and enjoy, but it really bothers me when I see serious analysis of the game’s story and interactions with my own content that are like “Tanith is such a good mother!” and “this family is so wholesome!” when the actual story involves her making really questionable decisions that ultimately harm Rya’s wellbeing? there’s no doubt that Tanith loves Rya more than anything, but she’s lied to her about the Manor’s true purpose and the circumstances of her birth for her whole life, and then asks us to drug her so she forgets the truths she’s learned? like… it’s kind of baffling to me how these things are never talked about. I just think it’s such a huge disservice to Tanith’s character to smooth over all the flaws in her relationships, because her flaws are what make her so interesting to me… loving someone doesn’t always mean you’re doing what’s best for them!

• song i associate with them

ok I’m so sorry but I never know how to answer these questions because I only listen to instrumental music so I guess I’m just gonna pass 🙈

• favorite picture of them

I think this one is by @/Zlofsky2nd on twitter? she’s so pretty

also this image I edited

[retrieve-the-kraken]

So after taking some time to clear my head, and letting the wave of relief and closure wash over me, and feeling like someone literally unclogged my brain, I rewatched season 3 of Young Royals, but only finished just the night before I was going away for Easter weekend, so I didn’t have time to write anything.

But now I can finally say this: I liked it much better the second time.

And it wasn’t just the trepidation and anxiety that i had for finding out what happened in the end that kept me from completely enjoying it the first time. It was also that annoying week-long gap that we had to endure before watching the finale.

(I get that they did it for promotional purposes, and it was a lovely thing to be able to have that event for the final chapter, which obviously could only be one chapter, imagine having everyone there for the entire season, everyone watching for nearly six hours… no good.)

That gap, I feel, made it feel like we just landed randomly on an episode that was meant to tie up all the storylines. And of course it is, and of course it still feels that way in regards to some storylines, but wow, what a difference it makes to watch the whole thing as a whole, the way I’ve enjoyed the previous seasons.

I definitely could process it much better the second time around, watching calmly and carefully, and once I jumped straight from episode 5 into episode 6, it definitely felt more cohesive. It felt like it followed the same pattern as the previous seasons, the conflict at the end of episode 5 is very similar in every season, and it felt right.

And the final episode of each season seems to follow a very similar pattern too, except that it shifts a little each time as Wille gains autonomy. In Season 1, the climax was that Wille had to do what the crown said, on the crown’s terms (deny the video, keep August’s betrayal secret, lose Simon), because he didn’t know what else to do, he didn’t have a choice, sad ending. In season 2, he has to do what the crown says (do the speech, play the part of the Crown Prince), BUT he’s doing it on his own terms (telling the truth about the video, being with Simon, even if it means keeping August’s secret), he has somewhat of a choice, bittersweet ending. In season 3… well, it looks like he’s doing what the crown says still… and then he finally realizes that he does have a choice. Sad ending? Nej! He finally gets his happy ending. He has come to terms that the can have a choice.

The second time around, just when we thought we were getting yet another sad ending or bittersweet ending like the previous seasons, it shifted. Plot twist, he’s getting out of the car. Of course there is a lot up in the air (was your first thought also literally “but Wille, you left your bag in the car! You don’t have a toothbrush! You don’t have a phone charger! You don’t have clean underwear!” or are you normal? I am not normal, I have anxiety about things like that), there are many things that will still need to be resolved after the credits roll, but… it felt right.

And of course there are things that got tied up and still felt a bit quick, and things that felt annoyingly left up in the air, but that was precisely what happened each season, things that felt like maybe would get properly addressed the next season, but that’s not how life works. Not everything gets resolved. And it feels a little sadder or more bitter because we’re not getting another season.

But we are. It’s playing in our heads right now. People are writing fanfiction about it. And I can’t wait to absorb it all.

I’m definitely watching the whole season again, and doing a play-by-play analysis like I did for season 2, because I love hyperanalyzing every detail of this show.

Can I just preliminarily warn that I will be gushing about Edvin and Omar, and Nikita and Frida and Malte, so so much? Because the second time watching season 3, I was in awe, true awe, of how good they have all gotten. I mean, they’ve all been incredible from day one, but I feel like there were nuances to their characters this season that highlighted so much how incredible they all are. Particularly my babies, Edvin and Omar, deserve all the awards. Can’t wait to see everything they do.

I will miss them with all my soul. But I don’t have to let go of them yet.

[she-posts-nerdy-stuff]

It’s gone midnight and I’m thinking about Six of Crows so y’all know what that means: it’s time for a long rambling thought process that will hopefully have some interesting insights into the books in it.

I want to talk about the animal, mostly bird, symbolism of these books because although it’s obviously something we’re very aware of I also think it’s something that runs a lot deeper than we necessarily always realise/talk about. Even when people aren’t being directly involved in bird metaphors (crows, pigeons, peacocks) they are often described as “squawking”, “flapping”, or with other phrases that further this semantic field.

Now the crows is obviously the main source of the symbolism, and it’s openly talked about in the book with the speech on how the recognise human faces and how they support each other. I’ve also seen a few people online talking about the Crows in conjunction with a poem/nursery rhyme about crows (it’s one of those that has many different versions spun of it, some know it was counting magpies rather than crows) wherein 6 crows symbolises gold, of course greatly linked to the plot of the novels as well as their anti-extreme capitalism message. It’s also key to mention that crows are massively underestimated birds in the general public view; they’re far ‘smarter’ animals than we would typically expect. Crows have a very high brain to body mass ratio, I believe the highest of any birds but don’t quote me on that, and although we understand very little about the brain the size ratio is currently considered a very good indicator for the general intelligence level of the animal. Crows can make tools, hide their food, mate for life, and - VERY interestingly for this book analysis - have even been suspected to hold funerals. Now I want to be clear I’m working on a mix of random knowledge and the first helpful looking website that came up when I googled ‘fun facts about crows’ so I am by no means an expert here, but to my understanding the practice that was initially considered to be a ‘crow funeral’ is actually a process wherein crows will gather around a dead crow to look for potential danger. So I feel like the links I’m establishing here are relatively obvious, the point is that, like the birds themselves, the Crows are undervalued, underestimated, and unexpectedly successful. But the symbol of the crow in these books arguably goes even further.

The crow-headed handle of Kaz’s cane represents everything about the crow I’ve already mentioned on top of his own symbolic layering to the cane as a sign that no part of him has not been broken, and no part him is not better for having been broken. So in Chapter 27 of Crooked Kingdom, when Kaz returns to the Slat and fights the Dregs before leading a coup against Per Haskell, the cane with the fake crow’s head that Haskell has contrived to mock him effectively represents the failing of everything the Dregs represent. They’re last, the remnants, the people with nowhere else to go: they are the people who have been broken and have made something new for themselves. Except Haskell. So the sheer ridiculousness of him mocking Kaz’s cane, something he clearly thought would win him favour and success, in the end becomes one of the biggest aspects of his downfall. Inej describes the moment when the Dregs begin to support Kaz, the way the look at Per Haskell with discomfort - “the feathers in his hat, the canes in his hands” (and then she goes on to highlight how they’ve seen Kaz use his cane in fights, “wielded with such precision”, whereas Haskell is washed-up, pathetic, never could have taken the fight Kaz did and walked out the other side). Of course they realise, then, how completely and utterly wrong all of this was. Because when they’re confronted with both of those canes they realise something. They know what Kaz’s cane represents; it’s power and strength in spite of a world that has that has scorned him, it’s taking something that was broken and not fixing it but emphasising it and making it into a threat, into a symbol, into a strength. They know that, even though they don’t know what happens in Kaz’s head, because they see themselves in that. The Dregs; the literal bottom of the Barrel, who have been broken and who have clawed their way to survival. They cannot see themselves in Haskell’s mockery cane. Haskell is not a man who reflects what the Dregs are at their core, but Kaz is. The emphasis on the feathers is also really interesting, because I think it’s implying a sort of gaudy, colourful feathering that (despite fitting in with the style of the Barrel) does not represent the symbol of the crow; it is not something shadowed, something half hidden that could have an unexpected bite. It’s almost more akin to Heleen’s gaudy peacock feathers than it is to anything the Dregs understand, or represent through being Crows.

The pigeons I don’t really see anyone talking about, but I think it’s pretty interesting. The idea of ‘the pigeon’ is the same as ‘the mark’; they’re the victim, the fool who’s easy to swindle. I think the imagery of the fools being pigeons, ie being everywhere and massively populating big cities, is really clever to show a divide between the few, the Crows, and the many, the pigeons. However, it’s not only the Crows who remark on others being ‘pigeons’, but other gangs as well. When Kaz confronts Pekka about the scam he ran on him and Jordie, he says “you were just two pigeons, and I happened to be the one who plucked you”. I’m not gonna lie to you guys I’m losing my point slightly, but I just googled ‘crows and pigeons’ and the first thing that came up was about how crows sometimes eat pigeons so I reckon that’s pretty relevant.

Ok I’m really tired and I feel like I’m clutching at straws here, so I dunno I guess if this does well then I’ll cover peacocks, lions, and the general semantic field of birds in another post. I hope at least some of this made sense, thanks for reading it if you bothered to get this far

[v3lvet-midnight]

Hello! I'd like to request for a DC matchup please. ^^

Name: Aurora  Pronouns: they/them Character preference: Someone from teen titans or the batfam

MBTI: INFP Enneagram: 4w5 sp/sx Zodiac: Cancer Moral alignment: True neutral (leaning slightly towards lawful evil)

Personality: Introspective and rational, terrified of conflict. I daydream a lot and tend to space out when I’m not talking to someone. I’m a true introvert, but I love to talk to certain people and about things I find interesting, like my fixations or a fun hypothetical situation. I observe people more than I want to interact with them. I'm also good at reading people (to the point where my brother thinks I can read people's minds). Purple represents me best as a colour.

I value my authenticity, creativity and emotional intelligence (I can’t say I’m really empathetic, but I listen to people when they need me to and I try to be there for them). But I am quite sensitive and emotional. I tend to remember events in which I was hurt easily. My friend would describe me as a jaded Disney princess because I daydream a lot and used to be idealistic as a kid but now I'm more of a realist/pessimist. They also say that I can be blunt most of the time.

Love languages: Giving - gift giving and quality time, receiving - words of affirmation and acts of service

Hobbies: Reading, looking for fanfiction with amazing writing styles (descriptions, vibes, the closer it reads like poetry, the better), writing (fanfiction for now, but I plan to become a professional writer in the future e.g. movies, tv shows, manga), listening to music, psychoanalyzing people, analyzing fictional characters, watching horror movie summaries and anime/movie reaction videos

Likes: POETRY, anime (mostly shounen, but I've watched some movies as well), manga, analyzing characters with many layers to them, personality typology (the closest thing I've had to a hyperfixation. my all-time favourite is enneagram, but I’ve had astrology and MBTI phases), personality quizzes, action or comedy movies, visiting cafes, looking at sunrises and sunsets, watching storms (LIGHTNING), crochet flowers and plushies (I don’t crochet, I just buy them), phone charms, the colour purple, window shopping, video essays (marketing - celebrities, not companies, somewhat deep topics like love and philosophy, literature and film analysis - especially themes of horror movies, despite me being too chicken to actually watch the moves)

Thank you for your hard work!

𝕷𝖔𝖆𝖉𝖎𝖓𝖌 𝖒𝖆𝖙𝖈𝖍𝖚𝖕...

𝖈𝖆𝖘𝖘𝖆𝖓𝖉𝖗𝖆 𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖓- 𝖇𝖆𝖙𝖌𝖎𝖗𝖑

you're good at reading people, and as a girl with limited speech and mostly uses body language to communicate ...it fits in my opinion

she feels you understand her, and initially that's what brought you both together at least before Barbara taught her to speak. Cassandra was overjoyed the days you'd also join in on the lessons and help her it just made things more comfortable for her with you around

once she learned to read more, she definitely loved joining you when you did, doesn't matter where as long as she was close to you, she didn't mind it one bit <3

she was the one who confessed, after Steph helped her realize her feelings towards you. She probably let it slip out on a night of patrol

she notices your habit of buying crochet plushies, and she began getting you some. though she wouldn't give them to you up front, you'd just find them in your stuff or somewhere she knows you'd find them with a sweet little note from her

Shes also a good listener, and she will gladly lend an ear when you want to talk about something that you are excited about, she finds it endearing and your voice is something that's comforting to her so that's a bonus

⥅♡⤎

[lawlightautismtruther]

SUPER LONG LAWLIGHT DYNAMIC ANALYSIS RANT (THIS MOSTLY ONLY APPLIES TO THE ANIME)

It’s really not that serious, but there’s more to my thesis of L being a sub/bottom than just blorbo yaoi fuel. I‘ll call back to my post about L’s true emotional vulnerability that most viewers seem to miss, because on a surface level (especially when coming from the manga and when trusting the words of Obha at face value) you may see L as detached and cold. You’re supposed to think that L is unfeeling at FIRST but post-confinement/pre-yotsuba, the truth starts to seep out. L could have had Light convicted after seeing that no more criminals were dying since locking him up, but he didn’t. Even Aizawa admitted that it was enough evidence. You know it’s real when Aizawa agrees with Matsuda, lmfao.

Anyway, after this point, L and Light actually really start to bond. (I pretty much see lawlight as subtextual canon) L, not really needing to do this because of his access to surveillance, handcuffs himself to Light Yagami. He doesn’t want to be apart from him. I actually find it to be a comedically obvious act of desperation.

My point is, Light is winning the game, and L is letting him do it out of what I believe is love. L has found the one person in his life (besides maybe Naomi) that he really feels any sort of connection to, and therefore he would hate to watch that person die. L is inarguably a vulnerable character imo. If you rewatch the the series, outside of his internal monologues, he’s actually extremely soft-spoken and coy.

“Oh, uh, well it was nice meeting you”

“Light, please make Misa stop talking now.”

You get the point. He’s nervous. He’s super frail and holds himself very compactly, he walks with his eyes on the ground usually. He shakes when Aizawa lays a hand on him. He is terrified of shinigami. I think his coldness is an act to protect himself. I really do, because he knows how much things actually do affect him. In order to continue with cases, he has to pretend like none of it really matters to him. And he almost believes it at this point, too— hence his monster speech.

But then there’s Light Yagami. A worthy individual to truly understand L. He comes along, actually treats L like a human being (be it an act, I believe it still feels good to L, who has been treated like a robot his entire life), of course L is bound to at the very least see him as a friend.

I don’t believe L’s external behavior towards Light is an act. He didn’t have to be kind, he didn’t have to pretend it was a friendship. He had zero professional reason to do so. In fact, it very much made the case a harder one to solve. If we take L’s character at face value, he would have scrapped all of the fluffy shit (like asking Light to go get cake with him, telling Light he was his only friend knowing damn well Light wouldn’t budge regardless, etc.) Adding a friendship into the mix only complicates the process of trying to read Light.

As much as L the detective hates to lose, L the person is desperate. If he really hated to lose, why did he let himself? He’s submitting to Light’s will and THAT is what kills him. On the day he dies, he knows it will happen, but still, he treats Light with kindness. Sure, he asks him if he’s ever told the truth once in his life, but after that, he pretty much gives up prying. That’s it. He’s put his gun down. Since he’s going to die anyway, he might as well just enjoy being around Light. I know for a fact that he is smart enough to have come up with some sort of plan to convict Light post-Higuchi. There’s a book about that. But canonically, he didn’t do it. Notice also how L goes to Watari before he dies for comfort. L is really such a sad character.

The crux of his character is his submissiveness, hence why I’m such a proponent of that ship dynamic. Its not just a wet-dream, it’s something I sensed in their dynamic to begin with. It’s why I became an L simp, not the other way around.

Anyway, the anime is a genius adaptation and expansion on the original story imo. (At least up until L’s death— unfortunately it didn’t do the other Wammy’s boys any justice)

TLDR;

manga L- cold and domineering, hates to lose and mostly loses at first because Light outsmarts him

anime L- the very opposite and I LOVE IT

Look at me putting my 5 on the AP English literature exam to use! Also, I know I’m a huge L fan, but I am a Light kinnie and I love him as a protagonist in every possible anti-hero type way and would love to analyze him so let me know if yall want that.

Okay, class, any questions?