#like its not as good in terms of quality but that sort of makes it easier to zone out to u know | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

mostlysignssomeportents · 6 months ago

Text

Even if you think AI search could be good, it won’t be good

TONIGHT (May 15), I'm in NORTH HOLLYWOOD for a screening of STEPHANIE KELTON'S FINDING THE MONEY; FRIDAY (May 17), I'm at the INTERNET ARCHIVE in SAN FRANCISCO to keynote the 10th anniversary of the AUTHORS ALLIANCE.

The big news in search this week is that Google is continuing its transition to "AI search" – instead of typing in search terms and getting links to websites, you'll ask Google a question and an AI will compose an answer based on things it finds on the web:

https://blog.google/products/search/generative-ai-google-search-may-2024/

Google bills this as "let Google do the googling for you." Rather than searching the web yourself, you'll delegate this task to Google. Hidden in this pitch is a tacit admission that Google is no longer a convenient or reliable way to retrieve information, drowning as it is in AI-generated spam, poorly labeled ads, and SEO garbage:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/05/03/keyword-swarming/#site-reputation-abuse

Googling used to be easy: type in a query, get back a screen of highly relevant results. Today, clicking the top links will take you to sites that paid for placement at the top of the screen (rather than the sites that best match your query). Clicking further down will get you scams, AI slop, or bulk-produced SEO nonsense.

AI-powered search promises to fix this, not by making Google search results better, but by having a bot sort through the search results and discard the nonsense that Google will continue to serve up, and summarize the high quality results.

Now, there are plenty of obvious objections to this plan. For starters, why wouldn't Google just make its search results better? Rather than building a LLM for the sole purpose of sorting through the garbage Google is either paid or tricked into serving up, why not just stop serving up garbage? We know that's possible, because other search engines serve really good results by paying for access to Google's back-end and then filtering the results:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/04/04/teach-me-how-to-shruggie/#kagi

Another obvious objection: why would anyone write the web if the only purpose for doing so is to feed a bot that will summarize what you've written without sending anyone to your webpage? Whether you're a commercial publisher hoping to make money from advertising or subscriptions, or – like me – an open access publisher hoping to change people's minds, why would you invite Google to summarize your work without ever showing it to internet users? Nevermind how unfair that is, think about how implausible it is: if this is the way Google will work in the future, why wouldn't every publisher just block Google's crawler?

A third obvious objection: AI is bad. Not morally bad (though maybe morally bad, too!), but technically bad. It "hallucinates" nonsense answers, including dangerous nonsense. It's a supremely confident liar that can get you killed:

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/sep/01/mushroom-pickers-urged-to-avoid-foraging-books-on-amazon-that-appear-to-be-written-by-ai

The promises of AI are grossly oversold, including the promises Google makes, like its claim that its AI had discovered millions of useful new materials. In reality, the number of useful new materials Deepmind had discovered was zero:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/04/23/maximal-plausibility/#reverse-centaurs

This is true of all of AI's most impressive demos. Often, "AI" turns out to be low-waged human workers in a distant call-center pretending to be robots:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/01/31/neural-interface-beta-tester/#tailfins

Sometimes, the AI robot dancing on stage turns out to literally be just a person in a robot suit pretending to be a robot:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/01/29/pay-no-attention/#to-the-little-man-behind-the-curtain

The AI video demos that represent "an existential threat to Hollywood filmmaking" turn out to be so cumbersome as to be practically useless (and vastly inferior to existing production techniques):

https://www.wheresyoured.at/expectations-versus-reality/

But let's take Google at its word. Let's stipulate that:

a) It can't fix search, only add a slop-filtering AI layer on top of it; and

b) The rest of the world will continue to let Google index its pages even if they derive no benefit from doing so; and

c) Google will shortly fix its AI, and all the lies about AI capabilities will be revealed to be premature truths that are finally realized.

AI search is still a bad idea. Because beyond all the obvious reasons that AI search is a terrible idea, there's a subtle – and incurable – defect in this plan: AI search – even excellent AI search – makes it far too easy for Google to cheat us, and Google can't stop cheating us.

Remember: enshittification isn't the result of worse people running tech companies today than in the years when tech services were good and useful. Rather, enshittification is rooted in the collapse of constraints that used to prevent those same people from making their services worse in service to increasing their profit margins:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/03/26/glitchbread/#electronic-shelf-tags

These companies always had the capacity to siphon value away from business customers (like publishers) and end-users (like searchers). That comes with the territory: digital businesses can alter their "business logic" from instant to instant, and for each user, allowing them to change payouts, prices and ranking. I call this "twiddling": turning the knobs on the system's back-end to make sure the house always wins:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/02/19/twiddler/

What changed wasn't the character of the leaders of these businesses, nor their capacity to cheat us. What changed was the consequences for cheating. When the tech companies merged to monopoly, they ceased to fear losing your business to a competitor.

Google's 90% search market share was attained by bribing everyone who operates a service or platform where you might encounter a search box to connect that box to Google. Spending tens of billions of dollars every year to make sure no one ever encounters a non-Google search is a cheaper way to retain your business than making sure Google is the very best search engine:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/02/21/im-feeling-unlucky/#not-up-to-the-task

Competition was once a threat to Google; for years, its mantra was "competition is a click away." Today, competition is all but nonexistent.

Then the surveillance business consolidated into a small number of firms. Two companies dominate the commercial surveillance industry: Google and Meta, and they collude to rig the market:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jedi_Blue

That consolidation inevitably leads to regulatory capture: shorn of competitive pressure, the companies that dominate the sector can converge on a single message to policymakers and use their monopoly profits to turn that message into policy:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/06/05/regulatory-capture/

This is why Google doesn't have to worry about privacy laws. They've successfully prevented the passage of a US federal consumer privacy law. The last time the US passed a federal consumer privacy law was in 1988. It's a law that bans video store clerks from telling the newspapers which VHS cassettes you rented:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_Privacy_Protection_Act

In Europe, Google's vast profits lets it fly an Irish flag of convenience, thus taking advantage of Ireland's tolerance for tax evasion and violations of European privacy law:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/05/15/finnegans-snooze/#dirty-old-town

Google doesn't fear competition, it doesn't fear regulation, and it also doesn't fear rival technologies. Google and its fellow Big Tech cartel members have expanded IP law to allow it to prevent third parties from reverse-engineer, hacking, or scraping its services. Google doesn't have to worry about ad-blocking, tracker blocking, or scrapers that filter out Google's lucrative, low-quality results:

https://locusmag.com/2020/09/cory-doctorow-ip/

Google doesn't fear competition, it doesn't fear regulation, it doesn't fear rival technology and it doesn't fear its workers. Google's workforce once enjoyed enormous sway over the company's direction, thanks to their scarcity and market power. But Google has outgrown its dependence on its workers, and lays them off in vast numbers, even as it increases its profits and pisses away tens of billions on stock buybacks:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/11/25/moral-injury/#enshittification

Google is fearless. It doesn't fear losing your business, or being punished by regulators, or being mired in guerrilla warfare with rival engineers. It certainly doesn't fear its workers.

Making search worse is good for Google. Reducing search quality increases the number of queries, and thus ads, that each user must make to find their answers:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/04/24/naming-names/#prabhakar-raghavan

If Google can make things worse for searchers without losing their business, it can make more money for itself. Without the discipline of markets, regulators, tech or workers, it has no impediment to transferring value from searchers and publishers to itself.

Which brings me back to AI search. When Google substitutes its own summaries for links to pages, it creates innumerable opportunities to charge publishers for preferential placement in those summaries.

This is true of any algorithmic feed: while such feeds are important – even vital – for making sense of huge amounts of information, they can also be used to play a high-speed shell-game that makes suckers out of the rest of us:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/05/11/for-you/#the-algorithm-tm

When you trust someone to summarize the truth for you, you become terribly vulnerable to their self-serving lies. In an ideal world, these intermediaries would be "fiduciaries," with a solemn (and legally binding) duty to put your interests ahead of their own:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/05/07/treacherous-computing/#rewilding-the-internet

But Google is clear that its first duty is to its shareholders: not to publishers, not to searchers, not to "partners" or employees.

AI search makes cheating so easy, and Google cheats so much. Indeed, the defects in AI give Google a readymade excuse for any apparent self-dealing: "we didn't tell you a lie because someone paid us to (for example, to recommend a product, or a hotel room, or a political point of view). Sure, they did pay us, but that was just an AI 'hallucination.'"

The existence of well-known AI hallucinations creates a zone of plausible deniability for even more enshittification of Google search. As Madeleine Clare Elish writes, AI serves as a "moral crumple zone":

https://estsjournal.org/index.php/ests/article/view/260

That's why, even if you're willing to believe that Google could make a great AI-based search, we can nevertheless be certain that they won't.

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/2024/05/15/they-trust-me-dumb-fucks/#ai-search

Image: Cryteria (modified) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:HAL9000.svg

CC BY 3.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/deed.en

djhughman https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Modular_synthesizer_-_%22Control_Voltage%22_electronic_music_shop_in_Portland_OR_-_School_Photos_PCC_%282015-05-23_12.43.01_by_djhughman%29.jpg

CC BY 2.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/deed.en

#pluralistic #twiddling #ai #ai search #enshittification #discipline #google #search #monopolies #moral crumple zones #plausible deniability #algorithmic feeds

1K notes · View notes

theoutcastrogue · 7 months ago

Text

[From a 2014 article by John Darnielle of the Mountain Goats. He's talking about how a random spam email ended up inspiring a part of his book Wolf in White Van. Later, in 2020, the album Getting Into Knives came out, and I think it inspired its artwork too.]

"It took years for me to be able to just reflexively delete spam, or filter it so that I never see it at all. I blame the spammers for this; the quality of their work took a sharp nosedive at some point. But during whatever period of the internet’s growth you’d call the early 2000s, it seemed like you’d still get some winners: things that had been typed up by a person, sent out to a bunch of email addresses they’d bought or rented for 5 or 10 bucks from the only guy who was ever going to make any money in this particular exchange. Most of them went directly, if manually, into the trash; but once in a while, there’d be one that seemed to earn, at the very least, the minute it’d take me to read it.

The one I’m remembering here was subject-lined SUPPLY OF KNIVES. [...] The subject line opened on an all-caps email that boasted, in ornate, antiquated English appealing to the reader’s more refined sensibilities, about the high quality of the knives on offer at an external website. You shouldn’t click on links in spam email. I live my life on the razor’s edge! I clicked the link.

I want to tell you about these knives: They were beautiful. They were weird. They had elaborate designs in the handles, moons or stars of wolf heads, and special grips, and a variety of points. They were made from metals whose pedigrees were described lovingly, and had been struck — smithed? wrought? — via processes I knew absolutely nothing about, but that sounded fantastic, difficult, arcane. It’s the joy of specialized language: When you’re an outsider to it, it can’t help but sound cool.

Of course this is the whole idea of any operation like this. SUPPLY OF KNIVES could well have been, and probably was, a company in Ohio who’d stumbled across an old warehouse full of knives, and knew enough about sales to describe these things in the most exotic terms they could find. I’m pretty immune to pitches: Who likes to feel like he’s being pitched? But somebody involved with SUPPLY OF KNIVES had had just enough authorial flair — that, or true faith — to caption each knife’s mysterious, blurry accompanying JPEG with a description whose constant recourse to specialized vocabularies seemed to say, “You’re not even reading this unless you already know about this sort of thing. Let us therefore speak like the fellow travelers we are.”

It was like a trade catalog for roadside bandits in need of knives.

I can’t speak for everybody, but I know that when I was a child the life of the roadside bandit seemed like a pretty romantic way to go. I looked at all these knives and read the descriptions and was just generally delighted about the whole thing, so I saved the email in a “memorable spam” folder I used to keep that had maybe two other emails in it. A few years later, Apple came out with this robotic-arm-screen iMac you never see any more, and we were long overdue for a new computer so we got that; and then, after a while, I got myself a laptop, because I was traveling all the time, and eventually both the old iMacs ended up in the basement, and they were both asleep but alive until fairly recently, as far as I knew.

But when I went to check for the email, it was gone. The old blue iMac is dead, bricked, lifeless. Searches on the term “supply of knives” on this laptop and on good old robot-arm-screen find nothing. The backup CD for the blue iMac drive is probably in a drawer around here somewhere, but that’s like saying, “The coin I had in my swim trunks’ pocket is probably somewhere in the ocean.” There is no SUPPLY OF KNIVES. There’s only the memory."

[source]

And this is the wonderful cover art of Getting Into Knives. Back cover and promo material below. Note that "Knives International" and "Knives Wordwide" are not real companies, they appear to be a callback to that elusive spam email.

#not that I'm particularly into TMG #but it's interesting #trs #The Mountain Goats #John Darnielle #Getting Into Knives #Wolf in White Van #only knives left #tools of the trade #bandit #prison ballads #tangentially

221 notes · View notes

thewadapan · 4 months ago

Text

Spent today checking out The Amazing Digital Circus and Murder Drones, and god, the kids today have it so good when it comes to this sort of content. When I was a teen, I was obsessed with Red vs. Blue and RWBY, which I think it's fair to say are the equivalents of the time, and the sheer gulf in terms of writing quality and production value is stunning. I hear there were some rumblings of unprofessional conduct from the production company, which would hardly be surprising considering this is yet another guys-working-from-their-basement success story, but much bigger companies with much shittier business practises consistently put out much worse content than this.

The Amazing Digital Circus is definitely the better show of the two, thanks to its slam-dunk premise and some great writing from Gooseworx. The producers have talked about aiming to fill a perceived gap in the market between kids' cartoons (The Boss Baby) and adult animation (Bojack Horseman), and I think they have successfully threaded the needle to create a very unique tone. There's a sense of these works existing totally outside the mainstream media machine; they're not getting BBFC rated, but you just know millions of kids are watching them. It's on YouTube and the fact that it looks like some Frozen Spider-Man kids' slop just means da parents won't question what their kids are watching.

But truth be told, there's nothing objectionable about the content of The Amazing Digital Circus whatsoever. It's unusually metatextual and loosely apes the aesthetics of much darker media, touching on slightly more existential themes than your typical kids' cartoon, but it still has a lot in common with those same cartoons. The zany characters are all fairly one-note, and the emotional arcs of the episodes are honestly quite straightforward. The second episode in particular has an absolutely textbook plot structure to it. It's a far more self-assured and traditional style of writing than you ever see in this kind of independent work—certainly far more so than Murder Drones, which is written by an insane person.

More than anything, I'm reminded of how I felt watching Puella Magi Madoka Magica: that it's a very solid work of fiction, but that the people who'd get the most out of the work are isolated teens struggling to make the transition into adulthood. Certainly if nothing else, the fandoms of these shows must be bringing a lot of kids together around the world. I adore this soundbite from Goose: "Above anything else, I just wanted it to feel kind of lonely." You see Pomni's worldview shatter, she suddenly finds herself in a body that feels completely wrong, and she has to construct a new kind of belonging for herself.

As for Murder Drones, that show's absolutely fucking nuts, yo. The writing is at once painfully basic and utterly incomprehensible. If someone just sat down and explained the plot straightforwardly, it would be fantastically boring. But man, the presentation, the sheer delight the animators seem to approach every scene with...! I'd say it's clearly trying to use "the characters are robots" as an excuse to expose da kids to some absolutely shocking levels of gore, much like the Transformers movies, but midway through the series it starts straightup swapping the oil and wires for blood and bones and you've got to respect that.

The writing itself is so excruciatingly irony-poisoned that it goes beyond cringe and somehow wraps back around again to being sincerely funny. The show kind of wants to have its cake and eat it in terms of constantly lampshading how flat and cliché the emotional plotting is, but also clearly aiming to genuinely tug at the heartstrings and whip fans into a frenzy. And it kind of succeeds, I think! The way it veers between bizarrely high-effort implementations of memes, seriously cool fight scenes and horror visuals, and big emotional moments is very disarming. If The Amazing Digital Circus is an attempt to faithfully rework the American-cartoon formula for a slightly older audience, Murder Drones aims to crib the aesthetics of high-school cartoons while actively rejecting every traditional narrative technique used in those stories. Which means it's kind of bad, which means it's also kind of great.

If it's not already, then within a couple of years it will be deeply cringe to have ever been into Murder Drones in particular or (to a slightly lesser extent) The Amazing Digital Circus, in much the same way that everyone seems embarrassed to admit they were ever a Homestuck fan. But like with Homestuck, I feel like these series are genuinely pushing at the frontiers of storytelling in a way that's commendable and might inspire new kinds of writing once the fans grow up.

ENA is also pretty good, for the record.

#murder drones #the amazing digital circus #tadc

131 notes · View notes

crooked-wasteland · 2 months ago

Note

I'm very much looking forward to your Stolitz/HB is a bad musical essay. I've had my own thoughts on HH being subpar as far as a musical goes but never really felt like I had the knowledge on musicals as a narrative style nor as a music genre to do it much justice; excited to see you tackle the topic in regards to HB! 🫡

I absolutely understand the hesitation. It isn't like I personally have a masters in Musical Theory, but I think we as a generation have had musical theories subliminally inculcated into our psyche from the sheer amount of exposure that we can understand what makes a good musical and recognize when those qualities are simply not there. No one has reservations talking about how bad Wish was as a musical, and what I am finding in my own deep-dive for this essay is that Helluva Boss and Hazbin Hotel suffer the same issues as Wish. The lead in music being Sam Haft who is not a musical theatre composer and frankly doesn't understand how musical theatre functions on a fundamental level.

For a small preview of a major point in my essay that I plan on expanding much more, Helluva and Hazbin completely lack an understanding of musical diegesis. This may be a new term for some. Diegesis is most often referenced in how music interplays within a movie or film.

Most of the time the music is not diegetic to the story. When we have big moments in our media with that swelling emotional music, we don't think that there is an orchestra just off screen playing this music for these characters. We are aware the music is an external component to the story. In this way, the music is most often not diegetic to the narrative.

Of course that isn't always the case. Take for example Guardians of the Galaxy and how the films utilize their soundtrack. Starting the movie off, we hear Come and Get Your Love as we would hear any other soundtrack, only for Peter Quill to remove his headphones and the music can be heard playing faintly over them. That makes the song Diegetic.

Another example is Shrek. All of the pop songs in the films are non-diegetic, but there are diegetic songs in, say, Shrek 2 with the Fairy Godmother singing Holding Out for a Hero.

To pull back to more direct inspiration, Happy Day in Hell is nothing more than an embarrassing parody of Beauty and the Beast's opening number Belle. However, Belle is non-diegetic. The Townspeople are singing their thoughts and feelings, but that is not what literally is happening. And Belle turning at the end isn't supposed to be taken as literally the town coming to a halt just to follow her and talk about how weird she is, but that the town as a collective sees her as an outsider and she gets that sixth sense sort of feeling of people judging her. Because they are, they just don't say anything. That is a key crux for the film.

Every single song in Helluva Boss and Hazbin are diegetic. We know this because Vaggie tells Charlie not to sing and we are told by Angel Dust explicitly that Charlie is, in fact, physically singing. Stolas' song ends with Stella telling Stolas to stop singing. Striker, Verosika, Moxxie, Stolas, Fizzarolli, Glitz & Glam, and Asmodeus all sing as a part of a literal performance.

In fact, Hazbin goes out of its way to shoehorn in-universe reasons to have a song rather than just allowing the world to exist in that heightened reality. Additionally, by having the songs explicitly being legitimate songs in the world, we actually face more issues with the world building because on one hand Vaggie is begging Charlie to not sing and is struggling with the secondhand embarrassment, only for the denizens of Hell to join in? Except the world has established that singing is not something people just do. It is the one time the criticism of "Why is everyone singing" and "How do you all know the words?" Are legitimately valid questions.

This all screams insecure and shows a clear discomfort with the genre of musical theatre as a whole. There is no depth of understanding how music in musicals function, just like Wish.

That isn't even touching on how San Haft's lyricism is identical to Wish's worst numbers with how he just borks the internal structure and meter of his songs.

#vivziepop critical #helluva boss critical #helluva boss criticism #helluva boss critique #hazbin hotel critical #vivienne medrano #vivziepop criticism #vivziepop #spindlehorse critical #sam haft critical #sam haft is a really poor lyricist #ask and answer #musical theory #musical theatre

68 notes · View notes

monstersdownthepath · 2 months ago

Text

Homebrew Horror: That Old and Rotten Crick

(Art by @stranger-chads aka @bluejay-makes!)

First detailed here and further built upon here, the Rotten Crick has been plaguing my thoughts. The downside of working in a store that sells fishing gear, I suppose. This also is a departure from my normal intro blocks, since there's not that much more lore to go through!

Rotten Crick is a fisherman first and a fighter second, but of course a creature like him has to get good at filleting whatever monstrosity he drags ashore, alongside whatever assassins that enemy fey send his way. He also presents a very strange figure in any campaign he may appear in; he's immensely creepy and unquestionably evil, but he's entirely passive in the evil he does and can even benefit a community he enters! Not only can he teach men to fish, he can give them all the tools they need to do so AND defend them from greater threats at sea. Anyone who takes up his bargains may think they're being Devil Deal'd, but the truth is that there's an entirely different sort of danger in accepting his assistance that almost never affects the life of the person he's helped.

Rather than being a mundane source of fantastical danger (like a local lord using magic and conjured beasts to secure power), he's a fantastical source of mundane danger. He directly encourages and enables overfishing, water pollution, and ecological collapse, things that adventuring parties can't exactly solve by punching the right creature into submission. By the time the damage begins to manifest in a noticeable way, it's often too late to stop. Even if the party defeats or chases off the Old Crick, it could be years before the damage he does is undone, if it ever is, though the intervention of nature mages, other Fey, and spirits of the wilds may at least help clean and dress the wound.

If a DM wants to use the Old Crick to be a true and painfully clear source of immediate danger rather than a long-term danger, having him be a threat to local sapient sea life (such as water fey and merfolk) is fully possible. His animosity towards sea life peaks when he's faced with "betrayers," and he'll go out of his way to concoct terrible plans to cause their deaths.

Before we get to the man himself, though, we need to look at his two most famous pieces of equipment: The Tomb of Karaphas and the Tidepool Reaper.

The Tomb of Karaphas

Minor Artifact

Aura: Moderate Conjuration, Enchantment, and Transmutation

CL: 18th

Weight: 8lbs

Slot: —

This deceptively normal-looking but magical tacklebox contains everything an enterprising fisherman could need to do their work but a boat. The Tomb magically generates mundane supplies such as hooks, lines, rods, reels, floats, lures, baits, nets and whatever else as needed by its current holder. It can generate enough gear for up to six creatures to perform a day's work fishing and/or trawling, and grants anyone utilizing its tools a +5 profane bonus to Profession (Fisherman) checks (or similar), as well as to Survival checks made to gather food from bodies of water and areas nearby them. Anything generated by the Tomb dissolves into nothingness 7 days later.

In addition to the above functions, the Tomb of Karaphas is magically capacious, acting as a Bag of Holding (Type IV). What is contained within is largely at the DMs discretion, but it normally contains the Rotten Cricks four enchanted fillet knives crafted from whale bones (two +1 Keen Animal-Bane Daggers, two +1 Keen Aquatic-Bane Daggers), a Net of Snaring woven from merfolk hair, tools for preparing sea life for consumption, tools for whittling and scrimshaw, whittled and scrimshawed trinkets worth at least 4,000gp in total, no fewer than twenty bottled beverages of varying quality and alcohol content, and a corkscrew carved from a sea serpent's tooth.

Destruction: The Tomb of Karaphas and all its contents are destroyed utterly if gnashed between the teeth of Ragadahn while the Rotten Crick is dead.

-----

The Tidepool Reaper

Minor Artifact

Aura: Moderate Conjuration and Transmutation

CL: 18th

Weight: 4lbs

Slot: ---

This powerful, magical fishing rod is much more than its mundane appearance suggests. It's capable of fishing in any waters, magically adjusting the length of its line, the strength of the floats and the weight of the sinkers, and the size and design of the hook itself as needed, all such adjustments done on the fly by the malign intelligence within the tool with no action needed from the wielder. It's still up to the wielder to supply bait, but the Reaper can fetch bait on its own if a supply is left anywhere within 5ft of it. With a simple command, the Reaper will conjure a stand for itself and fish entirely on its own using either a Profession (Fishing) check or a Survival check (+10 to either), depositing its catches into whatever container is provided, throwing catches onto the shore beside it if no container is available.

In the hands of another creature, it grants that creature a +5 profane bonus to Profession (Fisherman) checks (or similar), as well as Survival checks made to gather food from bodies of water. Once per day, the Tidepool Reaper may be used to dredge up items of varying worth; this is identical to a 18th level Cleric with the Flotsam Subdomain using Sift.

Destruction: The Tidepool Reaper can only be destroyed if it is sealed inside of the Tomb of Karaphas when the tacklebox is destroyed.

------

That Old and Rotten Crick CR 15

Neutral Evil Medium Fey Init: +7; Senses: Darkvision 60ft, low-light vision, mistsight; Perception +25

------ Defense ------

AC 31, touch 17, flat-footed 24 (+7 Dex, +7 armor, +7 natural armor) HP 130 (18d6+54), Regeneration 5 (Electricity) Fort +8 Ref +16 Will +13 (see Shield of Hatred) Defensive abilities Evasion, Shield of Hatred, Uncanny Dodge; DR 10/Cold iron and Piercing; Immune Cold, poison, sleep; Resist Acid 20, Fire 20; SR 22

------ Offense ------

Speed 30ft, swim 60ft Melee Tidepool Reaper (rapier) +17/+12 (1d6+4/16-20/x2) OR Tidepool Reaper (whip) +19/+14 (1d4+5 plus pull or trip) Ranged +1 Net +17 (Special) Space 5ft; Reach 5ft (30ft with Tidepool Reaper (whip)) Special Attacks Fishmonger, pull 5ft, Supreme Angler Spell-like Abilities (CL 18th; Concentration +26)

Constant--Speak With Animals, Water Walking At-will--Fog Cloud, Hydraulic Push (CMB 26), Bestow Curse (DC 22), Water Breathing 3/day--Charm Monster (DC 22), Dispel Magic, Freedom of Movement, Hold Monster (DC 22), Quickened Spiked Pit (DC 21) 1/day--Air Walk, Control Weather (as Druid), Horrid Wilting (DC 26), Summon Ship, Walk the Plank (DC 23) 1/month--Salvage

------ Statistics ------

Str 16 Dex 25 Con 17 Int 24 Wis 18 Cha 26 Base Atk: +9; CMB +12 (see Supreme Angler); CMD 29

Feats Combat Reflexes, Craft Magic Arms and Armor (B), Craft Wondrous Item(B), Greater Serpent Lash, Greater Whip Mastery, Harvest Parts (B), Improved Whip Mastery, Quicken Spell-like Ability (Spiked Pit), Serpent Lash, Weapon Finesse, Weapon Focus (Whip), Whip Mastery

Skills Bluff +16, Craft (Scrimshaw) +28, Craft (Whittling) +26, Diplomacy +21, Escape Artist +26, Heal +19, Knowledge (Geography) 28, Knowledge (Local) +27, Knowledge (Nature) +28, Perception +25, Profession (Fisherman) +35, Sense Motive +12, Sleight of Hand +20, Spellcraft +25, Stealth +15, Swim +24, Use Magic Device +29

Languages Aklo, Aquan, Common, Elven, Dwarven, Goblin, Halfling, Orc, Sylvan, Undercommon; Speak With Animals

SQ Fearsome Fishing, Item Crafting, water breathing

------ Ecology ------

Environment Any water Organization Solitary Treasure Triple standard (Tomb of Karaphas, Tidepool Reaper, Old and Rotten Coat (+3 mithral shirt with no maximum Dex bonus), scrimshaw collection, etc)

------

Combat: The Old Crick generally only fights against creatures he has an enormous advantage against; that is, creatures his Fishmonger ability triggers against while his target is in the water, allowing him to utilize his Supreme Angler ability to attack with unavoidable strikes. Against surface-bound foes, he will use the Combat Maneuvers his whips afford him alongside Quickened Spiked Pit to dispose of most enemies, or Walk the Plank to drag enemies into spontaneously manifested bodies of water to take advantage of Supreme Angler. His Fog Clouds do not impede him due to his mist sight, and he will use them to confound enemies relying on sight and keep his distance to utilize his whip's power to their full potential. Other favored tactics include utilizing the disarming ability of whips he wields to relieve enemies of their equipment before throwing the items into his conjured pits, or overboard any ship he's on. If he can throw his enemies into bodies of water with any ability, he generally will.

Morale: Old Crick is maniacal in combat against sea life, and bravely fights to the death against such creatures for the chance to end them. Against surface life, he fights only until the other party is unconscious or retreats, and rarely coup de graces fallen foes unless they are aligned with the sea in some fashion; he will likely steal what he desires from them and leave them tied up for another creature to find. When reduced to 30 HP or below, he will surrender and attempt to parlay and/or bargain. If his surrender is rejected, he will fight to the death.

------ Special Abilities ------

Fearsome Fishing (Ex): Old Crick wields the tools of his trade with such expert experience that he may use even common fishing rods or lengths of rope as if they were whips, applying his whip-relevant feats and special abilities (including Supreme Angler, below) to any such tools he wields. Magic fishing rods or ropes are treated as +1 weapons in his hands. His signature rod, the Tidepool Reaper, is even more dangerous when used in this way, responding to his will as easily as a limb; he may freely use it as either an +2 Aquatic-Bane Whip with a reach of 30ft instead of 15, or a +1 Aquatic-Bane Keen Rapier, both of which he is proficient with.

Fishmonger (Ex): Old Crick has the Favored Enemy ability of a 15th level Ranger (+6 to Bluff, Knowledge, Perception, Sense Motive, and Survival checks, as well as to attack and damage rolls), except it works universally against creatures with the Water or Aquatic subtypes. His hatred of sea life is so great that this ability also extends to Animals, Fey, Magical Beasts, and Vermin which live in the water, even if they do not have the Water or Aquatic subtypes. However, this ability never applies to creatures who do not live in water, even if they resemble sea creatures, as he commends such creatures for shedding their "horrid lifestyle" and choosing to "live properly."

Item Crafting (Ex): Old Crick gains Harvest Parts, Craft Wondrous Item, and Craft Magical Arms and Armor as bonus feats. He crafts Wondrous Items with incredible swiftness; any item that costs less than 1,000gp to create is crafted in 4 hours instead of 8.

Shield of Hatred (Su): The waves of hate flowing off Old Crick prevents sea life from easily touching him. He adds half the bonuses gained from Fishmonger (+3) as a profane bonus to his AC, to his CMD, and his saving throws against the attacks, abilities, maneuvers, and spells of any creature with the Aquatic or Water subtypes. He never counts as a willing target for the abilities of such creatures, even if he is magically compelled to do so.

Supreme Angler (Ex): Over the years, Old Crick has fished in the strangest waters one can imagine, and it's given him an insurmountable advantage when attacking the beasts of the sea. He ignores cover and concealment when attacking creatures that are partially or fully underwater while he himself is on the surface (whether on a shoreline, on a boat, or standing on the water). Each round, he gains a +20 profane bonus to the first attack roll or CMB check he makes with a whip against partially or fully submerged targets.

#Homebrew Horror #original concepts #tinkering with the layout a little bit to see if it's easier to read for people #criticisms welcome #trypophobia #<-be wary if you zoom in at his barnacled body

66 notes · View notes

superectojazzmage · 1 year ago

Text

Watched the Nimona movie last night. Review I guess. It was pretty damn good. Definitely would’ve probably been regarded as Blue Sky’s magnum opus if they’d gotten to release it instead of being fucked over by Disney. Very cute, very funny, very powerful in the right moments. A thing that stuck out to me is that it’s really only an adaptation in the loosest sense of the word. It takes the core premise and beats of the comic but is functionally an entirely different kind of story that does its own thing. And given that ND Stevenson was heavily involved in production, I suspect that was intentional.

The comic was much darker and more downbeat in a lot of ways, plus it was significantly longer and thus could afford to be slower paced. But more than that, it was a lot more meaty in terms of themes and scope. The whole “LGBT allegory” element was there, but it wasn’t the sole focus, the comic was a story about a lot of different things; not just an LGBT experience, but also discussion of fantasy genre tropes and clichés, criticism of other fantasy deconstructions, character study, exploring what it means to be a hero or villain, critique of the glorification of crime and cruelty in underprivileged communities, corruption in governments, peer pressure, the senseless and self-perpetuating nature of violence, the worthlessness of revenge, etc.. And above all that, it was a story about trauma and people’s responses to it, with Ballister representing people who actually deal with their problems and move on while Nimona represented people who let their mistakes and suffering and grief consume their identity, or worse, use it as an excuse to indulge their worst qualities and take out their feelings on everyone around them.

The movie, by contrast, has a much more narrow focus. The LGBT allegory is front and center and basically the entire focal point of the movie, aside from a spattering of themes about the danger of zealotry and rigid fundamentalist thinking. This gives the movie a much tighter narrative and pacing that suits its inherently shorter runtime, but also leads to a ton of changes to the story either to convey a different kind of message or just work better in a different medium. Most obviously in how Nimona is vastly more sympathetic in the movie and essentially really is the silly gremlin the comic fakes you out into thinking she is, scrapping the comic’s twist that she was a genuinely bad person who was completely serious about wanting to be a villain, caring nothing for the lives she destroyed with her behavior and idolizing Ballister because she thought he was the same as her and would thus tell her what she wanted to hear (i.e., that she was justified in killing and destroying everything around her in the name of getting even). And in the changes to the Institution’s history and nature. And all sorts of other things.

All in all, I feel if you go in comparing and contrasting the movie and the comic, arguing which changes are for the better or worse, you’ll be setting yourself up for disappointment in either direction because they’re two different beasts and it’s like comparing apples and oranges. So keep that in mind if you’re a fan of the comic watching the movie or a fan of the movie wanting to look into the comic. I think ultimately I still like the comic better, but that’s purely my personal opinion and there’s plenty that I think the movie did better.

Some other observations:

Riz Ahmed my beloved, thank you Mr. Stevenson for this perfect casting. Literally perfect for Ballister.

Acting in general was very good. You can tell this was a passion project for a lot of people, not just Stevenson.

Only two changes that are objectively bad are Ambrosius losing his awesome Van Halen hairdo and changing Ballister’s last name — Blackheart is a way cooler name than Boldheart and it’s a pointless change, one that I’d argue even hurts the narrative since it makes it too obvious that Ballister isn’t actually a bad guy.

The animation is really great with fantastic expressions, stylish movement, and wonderful aesthetics that perfectly suit the story, but there’s times where it feels a little off. But there are parts where it looks less “movie” and more “cheap mid-2000s CGI-and-Flash cartoon show from France”.

The humor can be a hit and miss, in a “going through the motions of a Hollywood animated comedy for kids” way. The movie excels when it’s either imitating the comic’s Old Internet sense of humor or going hard on the drama, but there’s bits where it seemingly slams on the brakes to do Illumination-esque Twitter humor and those bits definitely throw off the vibe.

Having an actual straight up attempted suicide in the climax was shockingly ballsy. I genuinely can’t believe they went there, but I’m glad they did because the film wouldn’t have felt nearly as raw without it.

I don’t know how they managed to make the Director even more of an asshole than in the comics, but they did.

#nimona #nimona film #nd stevenson #ballister boldheart #ballister blackheart #ambrosius goldenloin #movie review #animated movies #movies #films #comic books #dc comics #webcomic #web comics #indie comics #netflix #blue sky studios #lgbt film #lgbt fantasy

720 notes · View notes

thatscarletflycatcher · 12 days ago

Text

Annotated Editions: the case of Jane Austen's Persuasion

The other day I made a post about my poor opinion of David Shepard's annotated editions of Jane Austen's novels, specially in terms of how much praise they get in the Austen fandom. That last qualifier is important, because while in general I do think they aren't great in a vacuum, it's specifically the place of honor they get in fandom that makes my judgement harsher; not because popular=bad, but because, well, if you claim to be excellent, you should be excellent.

So I'm gonna try here to compare three annotated editions: Shepard's, Norton Critical, and Oxford World's Classics.

Let's begin with the introductions/prefaces. Prefaces are complicated, because for the most part there is a tradition in this sort of literature to treat them as a free space for an essay, basically fulfilling the role of an afterword, instead of working as an introduction, as a summary of the historical, biographical, anthropological, artistic, etc, clues that will facilitate and enrich the comprehension of the text by the reader.

How goes Shepard about his introduction to Persuasion?

There's a brief note to the reader before the preface itself explaining what kind of notes he has added to the text; so far so good.

The preface itself is roughly divided in the following sections:

a biographical sketch of Jane Austen (5-10%)

comments on the spot Persuasion occupies popularity wise in the list of Austen novels, followed by, as Shepard's argument for why it is so;

An in-depth comparative analysis of the whole plot and main characters of the novel, with other Austen novels, pointing "pros" and "cons." (90-95%)

A comment on how he thinks Austen's style would have been moving forward, disagreeing with Virginia Woolf.

The first section is useful to contextualize the work, but the second is basically spoilers + Shepard's opinions on the novel and on the novel as compared to other Austen novels; this latter part is of little or none usefulness to the reader, and even its quality as an essay has several very weak, "sloppy" points. For example, the assertion that Persuasion, like the rest of Austen's novels is a romance; not only because many would disagree, but because a good introduction would include a discussion of the genre of the novel, and for an Austen novel the discussion and explanation of the nature and tensions of romance, bildungsroman and comedy of manners is VERY important. Another weak point is the blank assertion that Austen never wrote a scene between two men alone, which is false). Another notorious absence in this introduction is the historical setting of Persuasion; it is a rarity between Austen novels in how relevant the Napoleonic Wars are for the plot and how firmly they date the narrative. Tied to this are considerations of class, and the meaning of the navy as a symbol of meritocracy and Austen's special relation to it through her family... none of which are even mentioned in this preface.

How does the Norton Critical Edition by Patricia Meyer Spacks tackle the same part?

When did Austen write the novel and when was it published.

Brief summary of currents of opinion on tone and theme of the novel.

A discussion of traditional views on the "femininity" of Persuasion.

Critical evaluation of this in relation to contemporary analysis of the ethical and the political in Austen and the novel.

Her own interpretation of the novel as an ethical study on the concept of self-love.

A brief note on the choices made for the presentation of the final text.

I do think, even by this brief summary, one can uncontroversially say this is a better preface. While it still lacks the practicality of information that is mentioned rather than explained about the context of the novel, its use of spoilers is sparse and isolated rather than extensive. No supporting references to other novels are made (which I think is a good thing, because those involve a certain requirement of familiarity for the reader), and while the personal interpretation of the editor is presented, it is not an opinion on why Persuasion is popular, but a reference, a way for the reader to organize and approach the text of the novel.

Now on to Oxford World's Classics, introduction and notes by Deidre Shauna Lynch.

Napoleon and the briefest historical context he provides for the novel

An analysis of Persuasion's uniqueness in the Austen canon through the character of Anne

The permanence/change break through the changed roles of houses and the predominance of travel in comparison to previous novels

The role of memory and with this a tieback to continue elaborating on the historical context of the Napoleonic Wars in England and the cultural change it brought in the understanding of History

Persuasion as a sequel-like novel, for which a main interpretative key is that of History and Memory

A stronger attention on aging and disability

The interrelation between war history and social history in the novel, and the time frame of the events

More elaboration on the theme of past and present and personal history, with a contrast between Sir Walter's reading of the baronetage and Anne's reading of the newspapers

An interpretation of Persuasion as commentary on Sir Walter Scott's restoration plots; Wentworth and Mr. Elliot as two forms of return of the past.

An analysis of The ConversationTM between Anne and Harville still on the theme of personal history.

A comparison between the two endings of the novel

The assertion that the novel isn't melancholy and nostalgic in the end, but open to the future

This introduction is much more meandering and essay-like than the Norton one, and in that way much closer to Shepard's, in its use of spoilers and commentary on a text the reader is unfamiliar with. It's definitely not a GoodTM introduction as introduction, but it still includes mentions of important historical context and keys to reading the text; and its commentary provides references not only to other authors writing at the time, such as Scott and Wordsworth, but of more contemporary sources as well. There is some poliphony to it beyond a mention in passing to Virginia Woolf.

Besides that, it's also worth mentioning that the volume includes a brief biography of Austen and a chronology of her life elsewhere, a full note on the text editorial choices, a selection of bibliography for further reading, and three context appendixes on rank and social status, dancing, and Austen's relationship with the navy. As much as I'd think those appendixes should have taken the place of preface and the preface a place of afterword, the information to the reader has been included.

In terms of this kind of extra, Shepard has included a chronology of the novel, maps, and pictures in his notes, which are features the other editions don't have that might be of interest; but he has not provided good contexts like the Oxford edition does, either in the introduction or as appendixes; or pieces of solid, well researched essays and contextual texts like Norton does. Both Oxford and Norton include the cancelled chapters in an annex; he doesn't.

Someone would reasonably argue that Shepard chose to include all contextual information in the notes, and here is where personal opinion comes across the strongest: I think he does it that way, not for the reader's convenience, but for the padding of the notes and to inflate the value of his role as an editor. The addition of titles to the chapters of the novel, and the repetition of notes and information serve, in my opinion, the same end. In my opinion, there is a substantial difference between providing someone contextual information before they engage with something, and giving it as the something unfolds. Your first experience of a soccer match would be entirely different if someone told you the rules of the game, the stakes of the particular match, etc, before you get to the stadium than if they were to feed them to you during the match; and I think the former is a much more satisfying and rich experience.

So, notes!

Shepard's editions have lots and lots of notes. For example, for Chapter I of Persuasion he makes 65 notes, against 9 of Norton and 15 of Oxford. A first impression would say "oh, that's a really nice lot of info!" until you stop to think if this is really such a heavy text that it requires a note every 40 words on average. That's almost two notes on the extension of this paragraph alone. Let's dig a bit more to see where are the differences in selection.

Norton's, as you might have guessed now, tend to be editions heavy on the commentary side through essays and articles, and so notes are minimal and sparse. The notes on this chapter are on "baronetage", "patents", "creations", "Dugdale", "worsting", "chaise and four", "Tattersal's", "black ribbons", and "alineable". None of the notes go over a line. Oxford includes all these, and adds "High Sheriff", "exertions of loyalty", "duodecimo", "heir presumptive", "awful legacy", "dear daughter's sake", "every ball", and "his agent". Listing all the Shepard notes would be exhausting, so let's try some general classification of the notes that aren't the ones above:

3 geographical notes that amount to "this is a place in England, see map", which are easily understood in context.

14 glossary notes which usefulness/necessity is very variable. Awful and town are very reasonable notes; one wonders the necessity of notes on bloom and independence which are easily understood by context.

This theme of usefulness extends to the rest of the general notes. That stillborns were not uncommon during Jane Austen's era, or that Austen's fabricated entry of the baronetage actually does look like an entry of the baronetage is trivial and not necessary for the understanding of the text at all. That lady Russell is the widow of a knight is something that the text will state the following chapter, and that knights ranked below baronets will be heavily implied there too. The explanation of what an old country family is literally reads as redundant. Many notes are like this: information that is trivial, explained further on in the text or easily understood through context. This is specially the case of notes like the one saying that cousin marriage wasn't illegal, that people of high status spent a lot of money showing it off, and that rich people also went into debt.

There are useful notes, but when you trim them down to the actually pertinent and useful, there aren't many more than the ones included in the Oxford edition.

Now let me take a look at some of the notes shared between Shepard and Oxford:

On patents/creations:

Shepard:

The book listed families in order of receipt of the title. Thus Sir Walter would first see the earliest patents (i.e., grants conferring the baronetcy); there would be only a “limited remnant” of them because most early baronetcies had expired by this point due to the death of all possible heirs. Sir Walter could only know this by consulting another book such as Dugdale (see note 9) and comparing its list of all baronetcies with the entries in his baronetage, for the latter would show only existing titles—that he has done this indicates how obsessed he is with the matter. This carefully acquired knowledge arouses Sir Walter to admiration for himself as the holder of a surviving baronetcy. He would later come to the many pages showing the creations, or new titles, of the last (i.e., eighteenth) century and feel contempt for their relative newness (his came from 1660; see note 12).

Oxford:

limited remnant of the earliest patents: a title was also referred to as a patent: ‘a writ conferring some exclusive right or privilege’ (Johnson). Sir Walter regrets the passing away of the families whose titles date back to the seventeenth century. James I had created the title of baronet in 1611 and had used the financial support he obtained from the baronets he created to fund his army in Northern Ireland. endless creations of the last century: Sir Walter’s contempt for the low-born recipients of the new titles that the government had distributed would extend to those who, like the commander of the Fleet, Lord Nelson (the son of a mere country clergyman), had recently been rewarded with newly created peerages for their war service.

Oxford omits information that will be said explicitly later on in the text (that the Elliot baronetcy dates from 1660), and in its place includes a very relevant example of a new patent to show why Sir Walter looks with contempt upon new creations, rather than simply repeating what the text says.

High sheriff:

Shepard:

The High Sheriff (often simply called sheriff) was, after the Lord Lieutenant, the leading official in a county, responsible for the execution of the laws. He served for one year. The position, usually held by a member of the gentry, carried great prestige and would be a source of family pride.

Oxford:

the chief representative of the Crown in county government, the High Sheriff presided over parliamentary elections and the administration of justice. Holders of the office (which is now a mainly ceremonial one) were chosen annually from among the principal land-owners of the county.

While Shepard gives me something I can gleam from the text itself (the social importance of the title) Oxford tells me what his job entailed.

The note on duodecimo is an interesting case, where technically Shepard's information is more complete, but he spreads it in such a way as to pad his note count and extension. He simply notes that it is a small book, and refers to a note on books on chapter X:

“Large” could refer to thickness but is more likely to refer to length and width. At this time books came in widely varying sizes. The principal ones were folios, in which a standard sheet of paper was folded in two to make the pages, quartos, in which the paper was folded into quarters, octavos, in which the paper was folded into eight pieces, and duodecimos, in which the paper was folded into twelve pieces. Thus the length and width of a duodecimo would be one-sixth those of a folio. The type of book would influence its size. Popular books, especially novels, tended to come in smaller sizes, while serious, scholarly ones were usually larger. Thus the size of Charles Hayter’s books helps spur the Musgroves’ worries about excessive studying. They might be naturally inclined to such worries, not seeming bookish at all themselves.

What's the reference for this note specifically? "and having been found on the occasion by Mr. Musgrove with some large books before him, Mr. and Mrs. Musgrove were sure all could not be right, and talked, with grave faces, of his studying himself to death." Clearly the natural place of this note is on "duodecimo" in chapter I, but by this strategy Shepard not only manages to make two notes out of where there should be only one, but inserts notes visually in chapters in such a way as to make it appear like he has lots and lots of substantial, erudite explanations to make all the time. This strategy he repeats a lot through the text.

It's these habits of trickery, of padding and puffing up that I find intellectually dishonest, and rather inexcusable in a man who is an academic and must know better. I have also accused him of sloppiness. Perhaps I could have been more charitable and say that Shepard is a Historian by profession, and the things that touch on the literary and the philosophical, his references are much more scarce and lacking, not particularly well researched (in contrast with his historical notes). I mentioned how despite being relatively similar in tone and aim, the contrast between Shepard and Oxford showed that the Oxford annotator was familiar with literary authors in ways Shepard wasn't. This reflects in notes as well. For example:

Pinny

Shepard:

Charmouth is another coastal town (see note 8, for a description). Up Lyme sits atop the ascent next to Lyme, and offers views of the town and sea. Pinny is a spot a little west of Lyme. (For locations, see map.)

Oxford:

Many readers encountering this description of the scenery of Pinny, just west of Lyme, have detected an echo of the poet Samuel Taylor Coleridge’s ‘Kubla Khan’ (composed 1798; published 1816). See lines 12-13: ‘But oh! that deep romantic chasm which slanted | Down the green hill athwart a cedar n cover. . . .’ The romance of the landscape is the product of a series of landslides, which have carried into Pinny Bay some of the cliff paths on which Austen must have walked during her stay in Lyme.

Marmion and The Lady of the Lake/Giaour and The Bride of Abydos

Shepard:

These are two long narrative poems by Walter Scott. In contrast to the above poets, Scott immediately achieved great popularity. The two poems cited here, his most widely read, were among the best sellers of the age—and in this age, poetry generally outsold novels, at least until Scott’s own novels appeared. Both poems are stories of love and war, set in sixteenth-century Scotland; a critical element of Romanticism was fascination with the past, especially the medieval past, and Scott was central to fostering this sentiment. Jane Austen mentions each of these poems in her letters. These are two narrative poems by Lord Byron, the other highly popular poet of the time. Both are tragic love stories set in the Middle East; fascination with foreign lands, especially ones regarded as highly exotic, was another feature of Romanticism.

Oxford:

The first two titles refer to long narrative poems, romances of medieval times, published by Sir Walter Scott in 1808 and 1810; the third and fourth refer to ‘Turkish tales’ published by rival poet Lord Byron in 1813. The poets’ representations of warrior heroes committing doughty deeds in picturesque settings probably contributed to their wartime popularity. Still, the notes that Byron appended to his poems adopt a more cynical view of their heroes’ sabre-rattling than do the poems themselves, in ways that distinguish their account of heroism from Persuasion’s, idealistic view of its chivalric war hero. Anne and Benwick prove themselves faithful observers of the literary scene when they attempt to adjudicate between Scott and Byron (an attempt they resume on p. 90). Similar efforts at a comparative evaluation of the decade’s two most commercially successful poets are pursued in William Hazlitt’s The Spirit of the Age (1825) and the anonymous A Discourse on the Comparative Merits of Scott and Byron (1824).

Our best moralists

Shepard:

These could refer to a wide array of works, especially from earlier years. The eighteenth century, whose spirit Jane Austen exudes in many respects, was characterized by a general preference for prose and an emphasis on greater rationalism than the Romantic period. Moral essays, frequently supported by observations on life and contemporary mores, were popular throughout the century. Collections of letters, often highly polished, also appeared. Finally, biography developed as a significant genre, and it, like much of the prose of the time, often had a moralizing tone, pointing out lessons and presenting examples of virtuous behavior.

The difficulty in following precepts of patience and resignation had been a popular theme of many writers, especially when discussing the influential philosophy of Stoicism, which counseled rational indifference to the ills of life. Similarly, as in all ages, many who preached virtue did not always live up to their preaching. One of the most influential prose moralists of the eighteenth century, and a favorite author of Jane Austen’s, Samuel Johnson, addresses this point in one of his essays (The Rambler, #14). He writes that ��for many reasons a man writes much better than he lives.” But he argues, “Nothing is more unjust, however common, than to charge with hypocrisy him that expresses zeal for those virtues, which he neglects to practice; since he may be sincerely convinced of the advantages of conquering his passions, without having yet obtained the victory.” Rather, he claims that such a man should be commended for attempting to impart to others some of his own, possibly hard-earned, wisdom. From this perspective, Anne’s counsel to Captain Benwick, which does certainly come from her own extensive experience, would represent a valuable and benevolent service to him, whatever her own failings in achieving patience or self-control.

Oxford:

The texts Anne prescribes to Benwick would very probably include works by Samuel Johnson. Throughout the second half of the eighteenth century readers made an almost medicinal use of the essay series The Rambler (first published 1750-2), in which Johnson treats such topics as the dangers of solitude and the necessity of resignation in the face of loss. Johnson’s biographer James Boswell claimed of The Rambler that ‘In no writings whatever can be found . . . more that can brace and invigorate every manly and noble sentiment’ ( Life ofJohnson, ed. R. W. Chapman (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1983), 154).

Here I would note that the much longer two-notes reference of Shepard sits between vague and repetitive, and that in my opinion both sin by omission of Shaftesbury (Anthony Ashley Cooper).

Dark blue seas

Shepard:

Byron’s The Corsair, a work Jane Austen mentions reading in a letter (March 5, 1814), begins with the lines, “O’er the glad waters of the dark blue sea, / Our thoughts as boundless, and our souls as free.”

Oxford:

Benwick and Anne perhaps recall the second canto of Childe Harold's Pilgrimage (1812). Its description of the hero’s voyage from Greece and of the ‘little warlike world within’ (ii. 154) he enters when he boards the ship certainly glamorizes nautical life: ‘He that has sail’d upon the dark blue sea, | Has view’d at times, I ween, a full fair sight’ (ii. 145-6). They may also be remembering the lines that open The Corsair (1814), a description of the freedom that the poem’s pirates enjoy as outlaws: ‘O’er the glad waters of the dark blue sea, | Our thoughts as boundless and our souls as free’. In a letter of 1814 Austen sounds jaded about the Byronic heroes, such as Harold and Conrad the Corsair, who enthuse Captain Benwick: ‘I have read the Corsair, mended my petticoat, & have nothing else to do’ ( Letters , 257).

'eleven with its silver sounds’

Shepard:

The origin of this phrase, which seems, based on the quotation marks, to be from a particular text, has never been identified for certain. One commentator, Patricia Meyer Spacks, suggests the phrase may allude to a line in The Rape of the Lock by Alexander Pope, a poet Jane Austen certainly knew well: “And the pressed watch returned a silver sound.” The phrase does not represent a literal description of the operation of the clock, for the component parts of a clock were made of other metals than silver, usually brass or steel. Clocks were standard parts of a home, designed for elegant appearance as well as utility.

Oxford:

The literary allusion has not been traced. In 1921 Herbert Grierson conjectured that Austen was here misremembering the description of the coquette’s morning rituals that Alexander Pope gives in The Rape of the Lock (1712): ‘Thrice rung the Bell, the Slipper knock’d the Ground, | And the press’d Watch return’d a silver Sound’ (i. 17-18).

Note how here Shepard is crediting Meyer Spacks, but does not reference where (the Norton Critical Edition), whereas the Oxford annotation traces the conjecture to what appears to be its original proponent.

The pen has been in their hands

Shepard:

At this time there had been moves to improve the quality of women’s education, but it still was inferior to men’s, especially at the higher levels—no universities admitted women. As for books, while women had come to constitute a substantial portion of those who wrote novels, men dominated virtually all other fields of literary endeavor.

Oxford:

even as she has Anne object to examples from books, Austen echoes the precedents set by figures in the literary tradition who have previously commented on men’s monopoly of the written word. Anne sounds like the Wife of Bath in Geoffrey Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales , who is exasperated by male clerics’ representations of women, and, closer to Austen’s time, like Richard Steele’s character Arietta, who recounts the story of Inkle, the mercenary Englishman, and Yarico, the native woman of Jamaica whom Inkle betrays, so as to counter her male visitor’s trite examples of female inconstancy. Arietta observes, ‘You Men are Writers, and can represent us Women as Unbecoming as you please in your Works, while we are unable to return the Injury’ (.Spectator, 11 (13 Mar. 17 n)).

I'm not saying that necessarily Shepard's notes should be absolutely excellent in every single way and aspect in order for it to be a serviceable/good annotated edition; but all the things I have mentioned above make them appear to me thoroughly undeserving of being considered excellent, above the rest, or definitive.

#Jane Austen #Persuasion #annotated editions

39 notes · View notes

talenlee · 3 months ago

Text

3e: Eberron is A World Of Locks

Hey, do you know the world of Eberron?

Eberron is, in my opinion, probably the best setting Dungeons & Dragons 3.5 ever had. This is partly because of what it presents as available, with its world-native Changelings and Warforged. Another part of it is that it was (at the time) a fresh world which wasn’t already filled edge to edge with Important NPCs you needed to recognise and respect and route around, which like it or not, is one of the predominant things about the Forgotten Realms that stands out in my memory. There’s a wealth of ways players can anchor themselves in that world, with its recent civil war, its dragonmarked houses, and its various discarded, collapsed empires. There’s a lot of stuff to interact with, a lot of means to have a place in that world.

In addition to all that though is an interesting addition to the world that may be a bit less obvious because of how it changed a 3.5 D&D skill in the context of the whole world, and made room for characters who were in a way, trickier.

That is, Disable Device.

If you’re not overly familiar with the way the skill system of 3e D&D, it was a point-based system where your class informed how many skill points you got each level, plus more for your intelligence and plus more for weird extra reasons. These skills then added to your ability scores as appropriate; to jump required Strength, to Hide required Dexterity, all that sort of thing. Sometimes you got advantages based on traits about your culture, like your size or your gross physical qualities, sometimes you had cultural background advantages. It’s like how Elves got a bonus to Listen, Search, and Spot, while Dwarves got a skill bonus to who cares, they’re dwarves.

The skill system was elaborate in a way that didn’t usually wind up producing necessary results. This is a structure that often gets referred to as fiddly. It was worth having 5 skill ranks in a skill you didn’t plan on using because of how it improved another skill, but also that didn’t necessarily matter most of the time, meaning there was a sort of budgetary exchange that once you got it, kind of just dangled there. It also had the weird effect where skills spread out across a bunch of things – being good at jumping, riding, and climbing were all different skills even though fundamentally, those were kinda the same thing and reasonably, being better at any of them would make you a bit better at all of them.

There were some skills that were fantastically specific, like decipher script (that could be used to uh, decipher scripts), or very broad like use magic device (which could fake all sorts of nonsense and work as a skill check for making almost any kind of spell available to the people with the skill). And in this space there was a skill that served to show how skills could be setting specific.

In conventional D&D, high fantasy worlds like Greyhawk, machinery was okay-but-not-worth-it. Disable Device largely lived as a sort of ‘pick locks’ skill, which was usually useful for disabling traps in a dungeon delving environment, or opening doors you didn’t have access to. These two applications steadily became less and less important as magical ways to open locks and close them show up starting as the players level up into the higher level material of level 3. At around that point, the capacity of Disable Device to meaningfully address a need of the party becomes somewhat token, as you can use Knock to bust magical and nonmagical doors and locks, and traps start becoming magical and therefore, best addressed with spells and spellcraft.

It’s a shame too because in terms of an actual skill, like ‘a thing people can do’ Disable Device is pretty cool. It indicates a skill and thoughtfulness that seems like it should be applicable to more things. Toolkits were sometimes connected to the skill, armour repair sometimes but the actual craft of being good with devices was orphaned for its impact in the world and its application to adventurers with a degree of experience.

Welcome to Eberron then, where everything is high magic, sure, but the magic is used to catapult past the industrial revolution. This is a look you may know as Magepunk (which I think is reasonable to use as a term for describing my own setting, Cobrin’Seil). In Eberron, there are trains. There are machines. There are devices that people use in their everyday life, and with that comes a more widespread vision of the applications of disable device.

Now, this isn’t to say that I’ve grabbed the entirety of the Eberron compendium and dug through it for every single time Disable Device is used for every kind of system or interface. But rather that I know, as a GM, in that world, when people are surrounded by trains and chains and industrialised components, and the creation at the scale that suddenly, you didn’t need to consider things like unique, individualised magical creations to keep things safe or secure or operate things.

This has an effect of turning most forms of leaders and threats, people who have spaces that players want to approach and interact with, suddenly don’t have to answer a kind of outsourcing question. If magic is what makes a place dangerous, the people who command dangerous places are going to trend towards being magical. Wizards are the ones who have menageries and laboratories and fancy alchemy stations and whatnot, and those are the things that sites tended to need.

Except if suddenly, locks and tools and machinery exist that mean that you can have a site-based challenge that cares about material components without necessarily everything being a bespoke magical construction, and that means that suddenly the boss that runs this place isn’t the wizard who makes it work, but instead the person who has the power, the means, and the access to construct that sort of space.

Disable Device becomes more useful as a game tool, but also, the world is a place that allows more people to have access to the status of being a kind of ‘boss monster’ character at the end of a character’s narrative. And that’s all through the transformation of the world-centering power of characters.

High fantasy, unconsciously or not, directs all the attention towards the wizard.

Which is a pretty sad trick.

Check it out on PRESS.exe to see it with images and links!

#Dungeons &amp; Dragons #Games

79 notes · View notes

makingspiritualityreal · 10 months ago

Text

Why Saturn Makes you Bad at Doing Things

Saturn in our chart is about things we don't have an instinctive understanding of. These are things we have to work hard (as in tediously, long term) to improve. Over time, we can become meticulous and more decent at this area of our lives, but it takes time for us to get there.

Example, I have Saturn in Aquarius and it took me over 10 years to get the hang of social media, and I'm still learning. Since according to Vedic classics, Saturn is "lame" by nature, these are the areas where we end up with what we feel are initially inadequate results.

What is the reason for such a situation with Saturn?

1. Karmic delay manifesting as lack of financial physical support in your Saturn area. You simply receive the necessary basic tools to be able to accomplish anything worthwhile in this given area with a delay. Example - I have Saturn in Aquarius in the 4th, and I really care about memories and pictures and organising them on socials as a sort of virtual diary. I have been a content creator for 5 years now. I endlessly struggled with inadequate technology, poor quality gear or no gear, and lower quality content as a result. Editing only takes you so far. Tools of the trade are important.

2. Lack of external support and education, delayed access to basic support and education. Noone is going to help you in the area of your Saturn, unless you have excellent synastry with somebody. You need to learn everything by yourself from the ground up, starting from nothing, feeling like you're behind your peers. You don't know yourself in that area, so you don't know what suits you and as a result you have a delayed awareness of what is good for you.

3. Which brings me to my next point, perfectionism. Saturn is what our soul wants to perfect and master, and then release once our legacy is perfected. You will not be satisfied with mediocrity there. I have heard it countless times from people "why do you care about random pictures" well because my Saturn in the 4th wants a perfect photo diary and I want it to be organized and look good. Memories matter to me so I take them very seriously. As a result, we end up being harder on ourselves there than the average person, because we want more, and we want better. If used well, as a result of this attitude, Saturn has the potential to deliver high quality results.

4. Not fitting into trends, first because of the delayed learning process, then because you skipped on major social moments. You just don't know how to be "cool" where your Saturn is placed, because it takes time to build up that ease, and it's always with a lot of practice. As a result, you feel inadequate and lonely in that area, because your difficult experience makes it impossible to connect with your peers, who may mock you over traits of your Saturn. Over time, if Saturn is strong you can become an inspiration and a trendsetter yourself.

5. And finally, and most surprisingly so, lack of interest. The mix of karma and external circumstances and understanding of futility makes us subconsciously reject deeper involvement in the karmas of our Saturn and its Nakshatras. Example, I have Saturn in Dhanishta and I simply refuse to do anything for the sake of popularity, to impress any group, or even join a group for status. I am ready to die alone in my isolated cute house (probably because Saturn in the 4th) just to be myself. Growing up, I denied all social adherence within my family, because I believed they do everything wrong. I also denied all social adherence to the most popular people in school, finding them shallow and disgusting, and throwing their life away while I put my head to my studies and focused on my goals. As a result, my personal journey is unrelatable to most people, because few have the gumption to resist their environments so completely, few are so critical of these environments, few people choose strife, loneliness and lack, because it's the right thing to do. So you can see how our Saturn makes us subversive, denying granting people any expectation in that area and doing everything "their own way".

#saturn #astrology #astro notes #astrology observations #astro observations

171 notes · View notes

carrotsofthepirabbean · 1 year ago

Note

I will say I think part of the reason OG Kirk isn't more popular on Tumblr is because he can't be crammed into the 'If one part of a ship is the unemotional logical one the other one MUST be the bouncy himbo sparkle softboy' cliche. Kirk can be goofy and has a good sense of humor, he teases and laughs, but speaking in Lord of the Rings terms, Kirk isn't Pippin, he's Aragorn.

Which is SO much tougher for the 'must distill every variety of character into the same 5 different people' crowd on Tumblr. There isn't an 'Aragorn' slot because 'incredibly complicated' isn't descriptive enough for cliche. Like yes, he's charming, but it's the quiet sort of charming. Yes, he's a strong athlete and a fighter, but he's fundamentally a shockingly huge nerd and spends his private time reading poetry and thinking about philosophy and what it means to be a leader. Yes, he's haunted, but he has a fundamental hope that keeps shining through. Kirk's got a serious job, and he's a serious person. He's an Adult kind of adult. He's one of the last survivors of a horrific genocide. He's killed people with his bare hands.

Spock wasn't bowled over by how bright and shiny and cuddly Kirk was. Because underneath everything, there's a fundamental sadness and loneliness to Kirk, and a simmering possibility of rage that most people would consider Abnormal. And Spock shares those qualities, though for different reasons. The thing that really shakes Spock (besides Kirk's iron sense of loyalty) is that there are times where KIRK is more coolheaded and professional than Spock is. In everyday terms, Kirk is easily and confidently emotional in a way Spock was always taught was a weakness, but when the shit hits the fan Kirk gets this shine of cold, calculating, James Bond-like brutality/practicality that not only meets Spock's Vulcan control, it will at times go PAST it. Surviving that genocide gave Kirk access to both a level of iron-willed 'do whatever is necessary to live no matter what' and a level of genuinely bloodcurdling rage that, when death is on the line, reads sometimes like a Vulcan on steroids. In a battle-type situation Kirk has absolutely looked at Spock and snapped like 'for god's sake, control yourself', and that is some whiplash a Vulcan doesn't just get OVER.

At the very start OG Kirk is already both wildly famous for and frighteningly good at being a commander, better than Spock is by miles, which forces Spock to confront his self-hate fueled 'Vulcans are better' prejudices over and over again until Spock has a starry-eyed admiration for Kirk that knocks him so hard into love that Spock's teeth rattle. Kirk isn't Some Soft Boy that grows on Famous Vulcan Spock against his will. Kirk is the most talented Starfleet officer in generations- He's Horatio Nelson, except not an imperialist asshole. Spock is (at first) just Some Science Guy who managed to nail one of the most coveted jobs in Starfleet.

Like, what is Tumblr going to do with a Kirk (who is supposed to be the bouncy soft boy half of Spirk) who looks coldly at an alien who is killing people and without hesitation goes 'I am a military man, we have a mission, we don't have time to understand motivations, kill that thing' and calmly walks off? And then Spock, (the unemotional logical one) is the one going after him going 'please, this is a thinking creature, it could be scared or hurt, think of its feelings, at least let me try to talk to it'. And like, the big lesson of the episode is KIRK being convinced by Spock to care more and be more empathetic?

Like, that's not some shit Tumblr can fit into its 'five acceptable personalities for every single ship ever'. There isn't a category for 'one is the logical one and the other one is the guy in charge on the battlefield that the men point their swords at while yelling "to the king!"'

But, it does make me a bit sad, because god, the relationship between Kirk and Spock is unique. Because Kirk is SUCH a freak. If there's a fictional personality grouping Kirk is a part of it's like Kirk, Chris Evans' Captain America, Aragorn, and nobody.

I super agree! AOS Kirk fits the bill more for the ship dynamics tumblr focuses on (and I do really love Chris Pine's performance, not half because it was what introduced me to Star Trek in the first place), but I do find TOS Kirk more intriguing because he has such layers. He's scarily competent, youngest captain in Starfleet and it's not like you get in that position by being a sunshine flower boy - he's got a streak of cold practicality that, yeah, is super apparent in Devil in the Dark. But he's also warm, loving, and physically affectionate with his closest friends, professional with his subordinates and his duties, calculating with his enemies, and overall an exceedingly intelligent individual who does not take his position and responsibilities lightly. And in terms of his relationship with Spock, it was all those things that drew Spock's respect and interest, and not (checks notes) his being a "bouncy himbo sparkle soft-boy". He's just a wonderful character <3

#I do however love a good 'spock blushes cause jim is physically affectionate' thing though #as is clearly apparent in the last drawing i posted. but i love jim for being a responsible and mature leader #including the kind of cold and practical decisions he makes #as well as being a warm and affectionate man #god i do fucking lvoe that man god help me #ask #star trek #jim kirk #star trek tos

222 notes · View notes

bairdthereader · 6 months ago

Text

Nick, thy name is Tenacity.

How many times does Nick have to psych himself up--often visibly--to approach Tao and try to engage him in meaningful conversation? So much rejection and distrust, so many walls to climb! But he persists.

The first couple of times Nick attempts to forge some kind of connection with Tao are probably mostly due to his new relationship with Charlie and Nick's desire to make sure that he's on good terms with Charlie's best friend. But you can tell as the story progresses that Nick's motivation evolves from that place to a genuine caring for Tao and an interest in his inner landscape. He wants to understand Tao, truly sees Tao's many great qualities, and knows the worth of the kind of friendship Tao has to give once he opens up.

And props to Tao, because he has a lot of baggage to sort through to be able to accept Nick, and he does that emotional work. Reluctantly at times, but he does it nonetheless. I like to think it's both for Charlie's sake and because he also recognizes the value of friendship with Nick for its own sake.

It's a really lovely process to watch, and it's so wonderful to know that both of these excellent boys not only manage to coexist as immensely important people in Charlie's life, but also grow to care for each other independently of Charlie. Just beautiful.

And then the magic happens...

⬆️ = the biggest emotional payoff ever.

#earning tao's trust is hard but #nick's persistance wins the day #worth it #heartstopper #heartstopper netflix #heartstopper series #nick nelson #tao xu #kit connor #will gao #osemanverse #alice oseman #joe locke #narlie #nick x charlie #nick and charlie #charlie spring

72 notes · View notes

suchawrathfullamb · 5 days ago

Text

Sure, there you have it:

HOW TO GET THE HANNIBAL LECTER AURA

Another analysis of energetic configurations and practical advice on how to embody the vibe.

The first thing to understand is that we analyze the energetic components of characters based on the actor's charts, because if we look at life as one big play, and theater/film being a micro reflection of that concept, then the director or creator of the movie/play/show acts as a god, casting a specific actor for a specific role. Therefore we do not need to know a fictional character's date of birth or anything of the sort, as the actors are always being cast in characters that mirror the spiritual stage they embody.

Mads was born under an energy known as Vishakha.

Vishakha is linked with dual deities Indra (the king of the gods and god of thunder and rain) and Agni (the god of fire). This duality embodies a push-pull of desires, ambitions, and transformations.

The potter’s wheel, a symbol of this nakshatra, illustrates the crafting of raw material into a finished product, the process of refinement through fire and effort.

Vishakha’s energies are often described as unstoppable once focused on a target, much like Indra’s lightning or Agni’s fire. This nakshatra often embodies an intense focus, sometimes to the point of obsession, in achieving its goals.

Just as a potter needs patience and precision to create pottery, Vishakha nakshatra’s myth conveys the importance of perseverance.

Like Indra, those influenced by Vishakha often have a strong desire for success, social recognition, and accomplishment, which is something we see clearly in Hannibal.

This constellation is ruled by Jupiter, the guru or teacher in Vedic astrology, and symbolizes wisdom, higher learning, and the search for truth. This planetary influence on Vishakha reflects a higher purpose in its ambitions — not just worldly success, but the pursuit of knowledge and self-improvement.

This Jupiterian desire for wisdom manifests in the nakshatra’s ability to endure trials and persevere through obstacles. Vishakha natives often undergo intense transformations, using their experiences to cultivate inner strength and insight.

The nakshatra’s focus on achievement is not merely for material gain; it is often coupled with a sense of idealism, where individuals feel drawn to accomplish something that resonates with their personal beliefs and sense of truth.

With Jupiter’s guidance, Vishakha’s ambition takes on a visionary quality, pushing individuals to set high standards for themselves. This can make Vishakha natives inspirational to others, as they seek to embody principles that resonate with the people around them, often motivating others to pursue their own paths.

Jupiter here manifests as a desire to help others, serve a greater purpose, or guide others with the knowledge they’ve gained. Vishakha individuals often feel compelled to share what they’ve learned, finding meaning in using their journey to inspire or empower others, which is essentially Hannibal's arc as the master, searching for worthy concubines to share wisdom.

In terms of personality they rarely show reaction, and are rarely stirred up or impressed, and are skilled at acting more pleasant in social situations.

They tend to remain under control at all times, and they only lose this pose when they feel they are failing at something.

They are often found at the top of the social hierarchy.

Because Jupiter represents excess, it often causes these individuals to experience frustration due to the necessity that we have of giving up excess to achieve liberation, so they often have a very good nature but also have a tendency for aggressive behavior. Which leads to them sometimes throwing everything they accomplished away in a strange way, which we do see with Hannibal in Season 3.

And because Jupiter's chakra is the throat chakra, they carry a lot of power in what they say and in general people can sense that and tend to just obey them.

They don't struggle to fit in because they do not care to do so, and this is obvious and causes that perception of ferocity and confidence they exude.

Mads expression number is 6, derived from 15, which is the energy of The Devil (what Mads and Bryan always say Hannibal is), and The Lovers.

The Devil representa trials and tests. Temptations and seductions. Magic. Disorder. Chaos. Passion. Lust. Dependence. Exchange, eloquence, mystery, emotional strength. And The Lovers is a mirror card to The Devil, and it's about chaining, combination, balance, embrace. Fight, antagonism.

The mantra to embody this vibe is Strim. It grants power. Strim (pronounced ‘streem’) contains the Sa-sound of stability, the Ta-sound which gives extension, and the Ã-vowel that provides energy, direction and motivation. It is connected to root meanings such as to stand, to spread, to take a step, to rise or traverse from one level to another. The mantra Strim provides the power of the Divine feminine (Stri-Shakti) to give birth, to nourish, to protect and to guide.

Strim is the seed mantra of the Hindu Goddess Tara (not the Buddhist Tara, who is a different deity). Tara is connected to Durga, who is often called Durga-Tara, as a protective and fiery form of the Goddess. She is the high priestess and represents the inner knowledge and the insight of the guru, particularly the power of the Word. Tara controls the weapons of the Gods.

#nbc hannibal #hannigram #will graham #hannibal #murder husbands #hannibal lecter #mads mikkelsen #astrology #vedic astrology #analysis

38 notes · View notes

crimsoncold · 4 months ago

Text

AEMONDSA: A crack ship with unexpected depth and appeal

A treatise (in four parts) on the intriguing parallels and complementary contrasting of Aemond and Sansa and the subsequent allure of them as a romantic pairing in Fanfic

- from the perspective of a sansa-stan, jonsa + sansa-centric multishipper, and someone who is generally Targ critical

Now while my general stance of "ship and let ship/don't worry so much about what other people in fandom focus on or ship/etc" still stands i wanted to do a little write up on what I've found so appealing about this particular crack ship.

Not to justify it (again fandom and shipping in general is just about enjoying/thinking about fictional characters and scenarios... no one needs to justify why their imagination likes to think about two characters interacting romantically) but because there isn't a ton of metas addressing the interesting parallels between these characters and the appeal of them as a ship so I wanted to make one so the handful of people who do ship it get to see some more positive engagement/responses to this pairing.

I just unexpectedly ended up loving this pairing so much and I always have a particularly strong urge to contribute to fandom content on the rare pairs/crack ships that I like....So here have a deep dive into the parallels, and contrasting but complimentary aspects of Aemond and Sansa, and the unexpected appeal of Aemond x Sansa as a pairing in fanfiction...

PART 1: MY EXPERIENCE WITH ASOIAF/GOT & HOTD FANDOM AND WHY AEMONDSA IS A PLEASANT SURPRISE

So I'm going to be drawing from both book and show elements when I consider and compare Sansa and Aemond's characterization and plot arcs (particularly since this tends to be how they are handled in fanfic- which all have differing combinations of book or show canon for both characters)

(this is a HOTD S2-free zone though... HOTD's writing has certainly not improved and it's inconsistencies even compared to their past writing and characterization of many characters including Aemond has made such an absolute mess so for this post I'm ignoring the worst part of HBO's attempt at making hotd fanfiction i.e. S2- and I am basing my understanding of Aemond on a combination of what can be gleaned from book canon and s1 because that was what initially interested me AND because that is what the aemondsa fanfic I've read has also been based on)

Now Just to set the scene for my journey as a stark fan, jonsa shipper, and generally targ critical person to become an appreciator of aemondsa...

GOT had a steep decline in quality in the later seasons and HOTD despite the incredible effort of the actors/sfx people was not particularly good to start with in terms of writing/storytelling...yet disappointing or poorly written shows are not without their appeal for participating in fandom and reading/writing related fanfiction, particularly when there is a handful of interesting characters-looking at you stark kids who suffered through the writing of GOT's later seasons and HOTD's team green-that fans want to rescue from the terrible writing/butchering by the showrunners and to explore alternative stories/endings for them... sometimes it is even one of the most appealing sort of set up for fandom/fanfiction to take over and fix things.

I was already a huge Sansa fan, and she was the original draw for me towards asoiaf/got fandom and fanfiction, and while jonsa has been and remains my favorite pairing for her I've always been open to dabbling in various other sansa pairings/crack ships.

(While the parallels don't take the exact form as the ones between Sansa and Jon- and obviously aemondsa isn't accompanied with the incredible foreshadowing and potential that jonsa is- this pairing still feels similarly compelling due to the sheer amount of parallels between the two characters and for the fact that its a ship that is appealing and seems quite fitting without fanfic writers having to stray too far from canon personalities/back stories to make them work as a romantic pairing- beyond you know the obvious aspect of them being alive at the same time)

When HOTD first came out and before i discovered Ameondsa was a thing I was staying away from HOTD fanfic for the most part despite my interest in a few of the characters

HOTD's most predominant focus in both it's fandom and fanfiction seemed to be Rhaenyra/Team black/ Daemyra centric- all of which I was at just personally not drawn. Aemond (hot dramatic anime antagonist transported into hbo's HOTD and personal favorite of mine) centric fics unfortunately tended towards shipping him with various TB characters or TB OCs but both as a concept and due to the handling/set up these fics were generally not appealing to me (more on this later).

Furthermore hotd fandom itself seemed to be shaping up into a new edition of targ stan centric fandom- specifically a new "team black only" brand of stanning... which is definitely not something I am interested in.

Being someone admittedly anti targ/targ critical in general who just happened to be more intrigued (and sympathetic) to the greens in HOTD it did seem that the bulk of hotd fandom was probably going to a similar if even more extreme form of what I encountered with targ-stan segments of the GOT fandom as a sansa-stan/jonsa shipper (ie. Less posts/fanfic that i would personally agree with or be interested in from these fans and potentially hostile and unpleasant responses or takes from the majority of these fans)

As a result of my general avoidance of hotd (i.e. the very pro targ/pro TB fanfiction that hotd fandom offered) Aemondsa, already an extremely rare pair and crack ship, wasn't even a pairing on my radar until one of the authors i was subscribed to started a hotd time travel fix it aemondsa fic...I have an appreciation for well written crack ships, and I am willing to give most pairings or fandoms a chance when I'm already a fan of either the story's main characters or of the author specifically ...but I was actually incredibly suprised how compeling Aemondsa was as a pairing in this story..as well as how much I enjoyed the other Aemondsa fics that I checked out afterwards..it seemed this was a niche segment of hotd fandom that i was going to absolutely obsessing over.

There was a lot of depth to them for a crack ship, which was achievable without altering their personalities and backstories very much from canon (dont get me wrong I love crack ships even ones where people and the plot are altered significantly to make a ship feel possible but there is something uniquely compelling when characters fit together without having to be too ooc) so I just wanted to write a bit about what is so fascinating about this ship since it's such a new rare pair that hasn't accumulated a massive audience or a ton of discussions or write ups yet.

PART 2/4. THE SURPRISING AMOUNT OF PARALLELS BETWEEN SANSA AND AEMOND (FANDOM, PLOT-WISE, but most of all regarding FAMILY)

(Uh ....Brace yourself? this section ended up way longer than expected)

For me the initial appeal comes down to intriguing Character parallels between Sansa and Aemond which fanfic at least offers the opportunity to explore in a story format ....

On a surface level they are (in the shows particularly) both intelligent and underdog figures with fantastic little sassy moments - true queens of dealing out backhanded and cutting compliments, or being unapolegetic critical towards some of the flawed and extremely privileged individual's they encounter who are used to receiving only coddling and fawning worship.

Both characters seem to get shit treatment, sometimes from the fandom other times due to the terrible choices/handling by the writers/showrunners.

Both were characters I personally found interesting and sympathetic despite how fandom- some of it for aemond and a significant amount of it for sansa- had deemed these essentially young and still innocent characters worthy of being reviled and harmed for the ways the adults in their lives had set them up for failure or abuse. Forever dismayed by the way they (unlike certain fan favorites) were somehow never deemed by fandom as deserving of sympathy for the horrible things that happened to them, and how notably they never recieve the same feverent forgiveness/understanding/support for their more dangerous or dark actions the way other characters did

Looking at the difference in fan responses to show!Arya or Dany compared to Sansa- though when it comes to the sheer amount of violence, destruction, and murder or the act of threatening their kin obviously despite what Sansa-antis say Sansa is the only one who should not even be part of the discussion, and how Dany or Arya always recieves excuses, sympathy, forgiveness, or outright praise from the core audience for their more questionable actions while somehow Sansa is deemed as the unforgivable, dangerous, evil, traitorous, and foolishly reckless character

How Aemond (and all of TG really) are set up and considered by TB stans to be unworthy of their house/rightful inheritance and the ones most at fault for the onset and destruction caused by a civil war... never victims mistreated or endangered by the more privileged and powerful members of their family... just the people who only ever deserved what was inflicted on them by TB for the crime of being forced to wed a disgusting and neglectful King or for being threats to Rhaenyra's family or throne simply by existing? How the morally questionable or violent actions of Rhaenyra, her sons, or more particularly her uncle-husband will always be seen as either justifiable, in the right, excusable, or literally worthy of praise the way Aemond's and his family's actions will never be viewed by this core audience

I think about how much like segments of asoiaf fandom bash Sansa by deeming her too southern/too Tully/Too Catelyn-like to be a real Stark (unlike her "truly northern" siblings) their are also segments of hotd fandom that have chosen to see Aemond and his full siblings as only Hightowers who are wrongfully stealing from TB/the "true Targaryens"

But there were even more striking parallels when it came to their characterization and plot.

Both younger (non heir) children, presented as being intelligent, incredibley dutiful and studious, with a very close relationship to their mother, in a sort of intense people pleaser manner - trying their best to excel at all the skills/duties that their parents/society deems necessary for their position and sex because that is the way they receive acceptance, attention, or praise from their family/the adults in their life

Aemond and his studies, his apparently dedication and success in training with the sword despite his own disability, his determination and recklessness to finally become a dragon rider like the rest of his Targaryen family- as it is what is expected and what he has long been mocked over by some of his targ kin, how despite his own ambitions and the way he thought himself particularly suitable for rulership he remained the dutiful and loyal younger brother who served as regent for his gravely injured older brother but did not attempt to stylize himself as King and steal Aegon's throne.

the way that Alicent seems to be the only family member he allows himself to be vulnerable with, the one with whom he turns to for consolation and comfort, Alicent being absolutely devastated and incensed over the loss of Aemond's eye and the lack of punishment for the assault on his person, the only one to demand recompense, the only one to raise a knife to the blacks when she is denied, how Aemond is the one person who tries to console his mother in the aftermath, how despite having just lost an eye he is the one who actually tries to sooth his mother to bring a stop to the increasing and dangerous level of tension and conflict that had erupted between the blacks and greens at driftmark, Aemond's own longstanding protectiveness of and devotion to his family- most especially his mother- that lasts until his own demise.

Sansa and the way she thrives and enjoys the type of world and training that is more of a noble woman's or specifically her mother Catelyn's domain- unlike her wilder other siblings she is generally a steadfastly proper and gentle girl- no doubt a comfort to her mother not just because she is generally so well behaved but in the fact that unlike her siblings she is not shown to be obviously or very publically close with Ned's illegitimate child- who for Catelyn would be the literal personification of Ned's infidelity, the disrespect and humiliation he puts her through by raising him in their house along side their children, and her deep seated fear that he loved and will prioritize another woman and her child more than his own wife and family.

Sansa is the child who seemed to love all things "southern" the most (though undeniably despite how Sansa is looked down upon for her love of romantic stories and song her other siblings also certainly enjoy legends and tales of Knighthood or Southern Princes and warrior Princesses) and to be fascinated by the environment her mother is from, the one who is drawn to and practice her mother's faith in addition to keeping to the old gods,

How Catelyn though she truly grieves letting her daughter go seems to accept it not just because her belief that Sansa would excel as a princess and future queen but because she thinks Sansa would thrive simply through getting to experience the south...Catelyn seems to grasp the things Sansa dreams about and unlike many other family members she does not view Sansa and her interests with the same condescension, dismissal, or disdain.

Catelyn loves all her children immensely but there is something so tragic and beautiful in her love for her daughters, the desperate lengths she is willing to go to to ensure the saftey of both of them while the lords/males in her family have already given them up as a lost cause and inevitable and necessary casualties in their war for vengeance and northern independence

Despite this affection though there is a lot of pressure on both of them... almost to the point that their treatment by the adults in their lives has a bit of a "parentification" dynamic- a manner that sometimes puts the onus on them to be a support and a comfort to their mother amid any tension in the family/marriage (Aemond) or to be the perfectly behaved role model or minder for their less dutiful siblings (Sansa)

Sansa, in everyone's eyes a lady at three and a queen destined to be, the determined effort she puts into excelling at being studious, accomplished, proper, and ladylike, how much she tries to exemplify the behavior praised and exemplified by her mother and her septa

set up by the adults in her life as a go between for the stark sisters...used as the benchmark for their demands and expectations of Arya, being held up as the bar for perfect, proper, and praise worthy behaviour that Arya is presssured to also attain, the daughter who gets censured on the few occasions she acts out while her younger sister typically gets away with her poor behaviour (at least when it comes to their parents)... Sansa isn't just under the pressure of the exacting expectations for a lord's daughter she also experiences the stress of being put in the position of exemplar for her wild untractable younger sister.

Aemond, apparent dutiful student in many areas expected as a child of nobility, who is expected to support Aegon in his rulership and war and (in the show) even takes responsibility for trying to keep his older brother in line, the one who after losing an eye takes the effort to comfort and console his mother's grief and rage when their father does nothing in response to an attack on Aemond other than threaten and intimate his wife and his children with Alicent in order to support his firstborn daughter, who becomes the human equivalent of not just a wrecking ball but a literal weapon of mass destruction sent out on behalf of the advancement of his family or later to enact terrible bloody vengeance on his family's behalf, his life his purpose and his death is all for his family's sake more than his own.

They put so much effort into being well behaved, to reach the exacting standards for a child in their position, setting an example for the less obedient/well behaved sibling(s) all of which in turn adds to significant strain or conflict between said sibling.

Sansa and Aemond are the sibling expected to and determidly striving to live up to the high expectations that the adults in their life put on them and to survive the extremely dangerous and high stakes scenarios they are put in (as a lord's daughter, prince's betrothed and future queen, a hostage and target for the machinations and ambitions of others, the older sibling, a ruling lady, and elected queen; a prince, dutiful son and brother, ruthless and dutiful defender of his family, and regent)

Meanwhile they have other siblings who struggled to meet said expectations or have given up attempting to all together (Arya, Rhaenyra, or to some degree Aegon)

Siblings who must from the perspective of Sansa and Aemond (who are still young, inexperienced, and have had a great deal of conflict with said siblings) seem to flaunt all expectations free to rebell, flaunt the rules, and generally ignore the high pressure expectations that children from their class face.

Undoubtedly frustrating since, much like their more rebellious siblings have failed to sympathize with the more responsible ones, Ameond and Sansa too have not (yet) been able to recognize the ways their less successful/dutiful siblings also suffer under the highly restrictive expectations of their class and position even if they do not choose or succeed in conforming to them.

They see that despite how they may excel in studying, striving and succeeding in their roles, and ultimatley exemplifying the high standards they were raised to it is these other siblings who seem to get rewarded (experiencing in their eyes at least what appears to be more freedom, less pressure, minimal censure or punishment for their misbehavior... while simultaneously receiving the bulk of the reward in terms of their inheritance, the attention they recieve, or even with regards to the amount of affection given by some of the authority figures in their lives, i.e. their fathers)...

To them it must seem that these siblings get to be not just easily forgiven for their mistakes and misbehaviour, but accepted as or outright adored simply the way they naturally are, whereas dutiful and non problematic children like themselves tend to be overlooked or underappreciated, and quickly criticized on the rare cases they misbehave... the acceptance and affection they recieve appears far more conditional on them behaving well according to the expectations of their family or various instructors/minders... whereas the affection their siblings receive, from say a certain parent, is show to be rather unconditional

Seriously they both give me such severe "easy" (i.e. overlooked) and "gifted" child trauma vibes... how much of their behavior is simply in their nature and how much is what they conform themselves to to make the adults around them proud... because as the quieter child or apparent outsider amindst their family/siblings this is the only action that comes natural to them and gets them some (hard earned) attention/praise in a rather large and loud family they otherwise seem a bit lost in... how much of their striving to succeed is dependent on the sincere belief/understanding that their saftey and potentially the future, saftey, and wellbeing of their family depends on it.

They both have a far more distant relationship with their fathers who favoured another sibling- a sister over them... father's who either didn't seem to know how to connect with them - Ned- or never really bothered to try- Viserys...

while i do believe Ned loves his children and they adored him in return i feel its obvious that he neglected in preparing any of them for the true dangers and realities of the world away from the satey and protection of winterfell and their Stark family, and he absolutely dropped the ball on keeping either of his daughters safe and supervised when he took them along into a very dangerous situation in kingslanding

Furthermore Ned never quite seemed to connected with or pay attention to Sansa they way he did with Arya... just something about the fact that when he follows the orders of his king/supposed best friend to kill Sansa's direwolf (the very symbol of their house) it is in replacement for Arya's Direwolf who was allowed to escape the cruel wrath of the Queen and Prince...and how he continues to fail Sansa in the aftermath

It's something about the gifts he gives his very angry and traumatized daughters to comfort them after- in lieu of truly trying to actually connect with and console both of them or to even properly mediate their increased fighting.

Arya (in the show and book) is given lessons with a "dancing" master who teaches her swordplay/water dancing, she was so excited and she always wanted to be outside learning to fight like her brothers got to, in this moment to her understanding she is not just seen by her father she is accepted and supported (a careful reader may see that Ned's attitude appears to be slightly condescendingly indulgent on the matter of her learning swordplay... but Arya gets the chance to do something she loves all the same)

Meanwhile (in the show) to try to console Sansa Ned gives her... a doll? (Honestly I can't recall any equivalent gift from Ned to Sansa in the books? the mention of her possibly getting harp lessons in Kingslanding was actually a promise Catelyn made to her on Ned's behalf rather than his own effort... and was something that Ned didn't actually ever arrange in the books)

But is this doll meant to be an appropriate gift to make up for the death of her direwolf? Is this gesture enough to comfort her and make amends after Ned killed her direwolf (notice its not exactly as spectacular, meaningful, or comforting a gift as arya's "dancing lessons"... certainly there is no indication that he has any particular understanding of Sansa or has given much thought into her talents, interests, or personality beyond the most shallow perusal)

In the aftermath of Lady's death Ned does nothing to truly protect Sansa or keep her away from the obviously dysfunctional and dangerous family he has promised her away to.

Yet he can take the time to comfort and have a frank conversation with Arya about how important staying together and supporting eachother as family is- especially when they are amongst dangerous people who mean to harm or separate them- and the specific importance her and Sansa will have to one another as sisters who share the same blood... further explaining how just as they will need eachother Ned needs them as well

Ned has no such comforting or distinctly meaningful exchange with Sansa... he doesn't explain the reality of the Lannisters/Joffrey/Robert (i.e. the truth of the people he has agreed to give his young daughter away to despite the fact that he either personally has no respect for most of them or has not been around them long enough to know anything about their true nature)

Yes it is the risk to his daughter that makes him willing to falsely confess to treason, yes eventually he decides its best to send his daughters back to winterfell, yes he finally wants to break the betrothal and he makes a beautiful promises to make her a match with "a high lord who's worthy of [her], someone brave and gentle and strong" ... but he is much too late to get both of his daughters away from the lannisters/kingslanding, way too late in his attempt to keep them safe, and he fails to handle Sansa with age appropriate respect and frankness and to actually tell her how dangerous things are in kingslanding and why joffrey (false prince -bastard born of incest) is such an ill suited match.

Maybe if he had put any effort into explaining things to her...or simply spending time with her, speaking to her, trying to understand her, comforting her amidst the loss of lady and the increased fighting with Arya, or doing literally anything other than just neglecting her and her saftey Sansa would have actually trusted his decision and seen it as him wanting what was best for her.

Maybe if he had been more proactive and focused on his daughters well being he wouldn't have brought both of them south after the altercation over their direwolves... or maybe he could have been successful at getting both his daughters out of kingslanding before everything went to hell.

Its almost like the whole point of the Ned/Arya/Sansa and the Ned/Cersei/Sansa dynamic isn't to show that Sansa is a naive girl who betrays her family for the lannisters but is instead to show that when you neglect your child emotionally they will turn elsewhere for comfort and will be particularly vulnerable to being manipulated or abused by other adults... its almost like this part of A Game of Thrones is more about the way even someone like Ned- a man who does strives to do what he thinks is right and a parent who does loves his children- can still fail.

Ned's treatment of Sansa is specifically intriguing, though i don't know if it will be addressed specifically since her relationship and dynamic with Ned is one that much like Robb ended with his tragic and unjust murder (leaving behind a grief stricken Sansa helplessly longing for the return of her family and home, grieving with a near devotional regard for her lost father and brother)... Sansa will never get to confront or reconcile with them over the many ways she was let down and left unprotected by her male relatives- and who knows if a traumatized and grieving Sansa will ever even recognize and admitt to herself the ways the people who she loved the most failed to live up to her expectations of them... how clearly that despite their love for her she was rarely their first priority ... how they both seemed to fail to follow their family mottos ... the lone wolf dies but the pack survives.... family before duty or honor... she was family yet duty and honor came before her in Robb's eyes... she was part of a pack but through Ned promising her to a marriage in the south, in him taking her and Arya away to kingslanding, in him failing to prioritize her saftey until they all were practically already on the chopping block, and in Robb abandoning any hope or plan of rescuing her she truly was abandoned by them ...to be a lone wolf without a pack to help her survive

Then there is Viserys who at the very least had a much stronger regard for Rhaenyra than all the kids by his second wife ...but can also quiet easily be accused of outright neglecting and mistreating them

The lack of guidance holds true for all his children really but with Rheanyra at least it is accompanied by an (ultimatley harmful) spoiled indulgence that he offers only to his eldest daughter- covering up her obvious blunders and threatening anyone who would speak the truth of her questionable actions and her children's legitimacy including his own wife and sons ... going against traditional succession not because he wants to promote first born succession/succession by "merit"/or treating daughter equal to sons in terms of inheritance or anything like that but because of guilt and unashamed favoritism.

Viserys refuses to give to his son what westeros society at least would deem as Aegon's birthright, while also failing to make arrangements for any his non-Rhaenyra children to have a future and saftey separate from the throne.

He doesn't arrange matches with other kingdoms and give them allies, protection, family, independence, or a power base independent of the crown/hightowers instead leaving them dependent only on the crown, vulnerable targets to be handled (i.e. no doubt killed on the orders of Rhaenyra and/or her uncle husband Daemon) as living they would remain the most significant threat to the legitimacy of their rulership.

Viserys looks the other way when Aemond specifically is permanently maimed by Rhaenyra's son...his only action after his son loses his eye is to threaten his second family, to intimidate them into staying quite on the topic of the legitimacy of Rhaenyra's children before he deems the matter concluded... as if the worst part of that altercation was Aemond calling them bastards rather than say four children ganging up against one and how one of these children attacked using a knife and cost the other their fucking eye?

That for Aemond more than anything must cement his understanding of his father's feelings about Aemond and his full siblings and mother. To Viserys they simply matter less than Rhaenyra and her children.

In fact their well being or saftey matters less than even an offense made to Rhaenyra's reputation... which shows Alicent and her children without question that they are in danger from the blacks and the King will do nothing to prevent the blacks from trying to severely physically harm Aemond or his siblings, and in fact that there will be no punishment for the blacks when they succeed in doing so.

A civil war between the blacks and the greens was inevitable... Viserys actions of protecting and favoring Rhaenyra while also not ensuring she is instructed on and practices/proves her ability to rule, willfully ignoring that she violates her own vows and that she passes off her obviously illegitimate children as trueborn heirs, of permitting her not just to inherit (and position her illegitimate son as the next heir to) what most considered the birthright of her brother but also for her to steal the birthright of her own cousins by supplanting them with her other bastard and demoting them to being simply their brides/consorts, him keeping her as heir not just after he has multiple trueborn sons but also after Rhaenyra gets remarried to the exact violent bloodthirsty man that so many feared and Viserys himself had previously removed as his own heir in favour for Rhaenyra.

Viserys doing all of this while still choosing to remarry and have MULTIPLE children with his new wife... the neglectful and disrespectful way he treats his second family... all of this ensured that the death of some (if not all) of his children, via either assassination or in outright civil war, would always have been inevitable.

There is so much hatred, fear, distrust, and tension between Viserys' family members... and not only did he fail to intervene or improve things he was the one most responsible for it ....so much of the environment Alicent lived in and Aemond and his full siblings were raised was permeated by not just a sense of deep injustice (particularly in Aemond's case with his treatment by not just the blacks but his own father) but also an undercurrent of desperate fear over what will happen to them and their family in the wake of a brewing succession crisis

The mommy, daddy, and sibling issues are so strong with these two and I'm so obsessed with how the complicated family dynamics and tragic family losses that Ameond and Sansa experience echoe one another in so many ways...there is just so much love, grief, rage, unpacked trauma, and hurt in them and I am always obsessed with stories that allow the narrative or characters to address such trauma.

PART 3/4. THE CONTRASTING AND COMPLIMEMTARY ASPECTS OF THEIR STORIES (SUFFERING AND GRIEF)

They were both were so young when they became targets of the wrath and dislike of powerful and corrupt "Queens"

Sansa who loses her direwolf at the demand of Queen Cersei, a queen who after long being abused by her own husband sees a perhaps more extreme form of that sort of violence in her own mad son being directed at Sansa, who rather than expressing or experiencing compassion or sympathy instead takes the chance to revel in the destruction of Sansa's innocence, to mock and emotionally abuse Sansa when she has lost her father and her only protection in Kingslanding, leaving her a hostage of war at the mercy of a violent and corrupt royal family

Aemond who after losing his eye to an attack instigated by Rhaenyra's children receives no apology or recompense...instead his own sister asks for her mutilated little brother to be tortured sharply questioned due to the offense he caused by accusing her sons -accurately mind you- of being bastards... Aemond and his siblings who were never truly ever treated by Rhaenyra as her siblings only ever the offspring of Alicent and thus obstacles and threats for her (and her uncle's) right to the throne.

Both were physically harmed or tormented by (or with the approval of) young members of royalty, with very little being done to intervene, stop, or punish those involved despite their own highborn status- which would generally deem them unacceptable targets for such abuse.

Young Sansa a hostage but still a high born daughter descended from two of the seven ruling houses in westeros, The Warden of the North and the Lord Paramount of the Trident, and niece/cousin to the rulers of a third kingdom, the Lord Paramount of the Vale. Who while under the "care" of the crown is tormented, stripped, and beaten in open court at the behest of a mad boy king... forced to look upon the severed heads of her father and household, forced into being an unwilling child bride to the house of her family's enemies, who is molested and threatened with sexual assault on multiple occasions

Prince Aemond son of the King who is mocked by his brother and nephews (or his king and father in the books) over the fact that he hasnt yet claimed a dragon, and when this makes him reckless enough to approach and claim the largest dragon in existence the torment doesn't stop it gets dangerously worse as the tension between the children of the blacks and greens escalate to the point of a violent confrontation between Aemond and his nephews and cousins... and the resulting loss of of his eye when one of his attackers brings out a knife. None of the children who banded together to attack Aemond would face any consequences, only Aemond himself and his mother and older brother would censure and outright threats from their King Father and Older sister. Whose earliest sexual experience- done at the behest of his older brother- was implied to be at the very least coerced, traumatizing, and humiliating- if not outright non consensual on his part.

Both Sansa and Aemond face a terrible sort of loss when they begin losing their family members to mass civil war ...often in a manner that is distinctly horrific or against all laws of decency in the 7 kingdoms

her father Ned unjustly executed for treason and whose decapitated head is displayed and used to torment her, her younger sister Arya gone missing for years and long thought dead, her home sacked and younger brothers Bran and Rickon supposedly murdered by her family's ward- a boy who grew up alongside the stark children- the burned/mutilated heads and bodies of two young boys being being put on display at winterfell, her older Brother and Mother slaughtered when their traitorous allies and bannermen men break sacred guest rights at a wedding, both their bodies desecrated in a mockery of their houses... Robb decapitated his direwolves own head placed ontop of his body while his enemies parade his remains around, her mother Catelyn's throat slit and her body dumped naked in a river and left to rot.

(In the show) Rickon being cut down before his siblings eyes by a madman who betrayed their house and had tortured Sansa herself, her "half brother" Jon betrayed and murdered by his men and later sent off into a lonley exile away from his family and home for the "crime" of taking out an invader who had just committed mass murder... Sansa being left to rule the north all alone with many of her family members long dead and the surviving ones being set on a path away from the north/winterfell while she is left to handle rulership in isolation

Aemond who after commiting the first Kinslaying of the "war of dragons" by attacking his own assailant and nephew Lucerys proceeds to lose all of the family that he loved.

Starting with the tragic murder of his innocent young nephew at the behest of his elder sister/uncle- who arranged for his mother Alicent to be attacked tied up and forced to bear witness to the gruesome murder of her grandchild,

His sister Helaena -who plead for her life to be taken to spare her son- forced under the threat of the rape of her young daughter to choose which of her young sons will be murdered. Only for all of them to be traumatize further when they kill Jaehaerys and leaving Maelor the son she "chose" to die to survive with the message that his own mother wanted him dead... the emotional torment this caused the whole family but most of all his sister who refused to eat, bathe, or look upon her remaining son due to her immense feelings of guilt

his older brother Aegon who has lost his son and heir, and whose sister/wife is in a grief so deep she cannot care for their remaining children, who is attacked and maimed but survives to live on in total agony,

the murder of Maelor, Aemond's remaining nephew at the hands of a mob

Aemond's last stand, sacrificing his dragon and his own life to take out his Uncle (the biggest threat to his family and the orchestrator of Jaehaerys' brutal murder)

The many tragedies that continued after Aemond's own death- his sister's eventual suicide, the death of his younger brother Daeron, his oldest brother outlasting all of his siblings and his own two sons only to be taken out by poison once the war is over, his mother spending the last of her years in confinement until she passes from sickness,

His niece Jaehaera, after the loss of her entire family, married off as a child in the name of "peace" and dying young and alone- of suicide or murder

There is just such fascinating potential when two characters would have so much mirroring grief and trauma ...there is such an undercurrent of helpess rage, guilt, and grief to them in their youth and a undoubtedly a feverent desire for either vengeance or justice against the many people who harmed them or slaughtered their family...

And here is where things begin to differ between the two in interesting ways

with Sansa who has these violent wishes/impulses but is not in a position to see them fulfilled herself- her desire to push Joffrey to his death even at the cost of her own life, her wish that someone will throw Ser Meryn Trant down and cut off his head, her hope that various people will fall/be unhorsed...

Sansa who recieves a direwolf, Lady, the very symbol of her house and potentially a companion that would have offered a connection that was an extension of her own soul only for Lady to be cut down so quickly and unjustly... Sansa who loses not just the connection/companionship she recieved from Lady but also the protection such a bond would offer her ... she is left vulnerable in so many ways and has no promise of reuniting with her own direwolf later on... that will never be a comfort or form of security offered to her after all the danger and trauma she experiences

While Aemond, who spent much of his young life similarly helpless to act or respond to insults and assaults on his own person or immediate family, (that his father/king either never deemed worthy of interference or punishment... that is when it wasn't the King himself who was the perpetrator of such offenses) unlike Sansa experiences a change of fortune in the form getting to bond with the symbol of his house

He gains (and gets to keep until his own death) a bond with a different sort of mythical beast companion... a dragon and as a result recieves all the potential for power and destruction that comes with being a dragon rider

By claiming Vhagar Ameond is the closest he will ever be to untouchable, not just from the harassment he personally experienced from his family but with regards to how grave and dangerous a threat/target he had now become for the blacks during the dance of dragons

Aemond now a dragonrider of the largest living dragon, a child and later teenager who is in control of the narrative equivalent of a weapon of mass destruction, and he is no longer held back from acting on his anger once the rule and interference of his neglectful father king is over,

he is in control of the most massive beast of pure destruction and unlike Sansa, who for now in the books- or for much of her story in the show- remained an unprotected hostage or pawn in the hands of those who mean to harm or use her... who handles her trauma very internally as she is not in a position to fight back, and must rely on her words, intelligence, and ability to read and strategically interact with people as a way of defending and keeping herself safe, Aemond is now in the position to enact every bloodthirsty impulse of revenge he ever experienced

He was held back from enacting vengeance only through his own will, which ultimately proves not enough- he commits the first kin slaying and soon the actions of each side escalated into a horrific bloodbath where nobility and small folk alike suffered or die en masse

While Aemond's story may be one of family devotion and loyalty, mistreatment, injustice, and suffering that ends by showing the terrible outcomes of revenge and uncontrolled cruel brutality Sansa's story feels like one where grief, rage, and mistreatment exist but where family, love, compassion, kindness, justice, and integrity will win out in the end.

Sansa was certainly developed into a more discerning strategic and ruthless figure in the show but justice, duty, and forgiveness were still very prevalent in her storyline

she does have ramsay killed in a fittingly horrific manner, but she later holds a public trial for littlefinger- who was responsible for much of her familys suffering, the death of her father, and her own torment and rape- before she has him executed,

She feels compassion and forgiveness for theon the man who had betrayed her family and drove her young brothers out of their home, who only after experiencing significant torture himself became devoted to protecting the remaining starks and was able to find the courage to disobey his own torturers in order to help Sansa escape,

She possessed a concern for other people that few ruler do in asoiaf/got... speaking up against Joffrey's cruelty even as a powerless hostage, being the person concerned with the more practical matters of caring for and feeding their people during a harsh winter- a notable development in comparison to say everyone else just focusing on battle tactics and the upcoming battles (as though feeding an army is not an essential part of warfare), and the invader who just burned westeros' food stores en masse and now expects others to feed not just her armies but also demands that her dragons be fed "whatever they want"

I think in the books however that despite Sansa's internal grief and rage and her burgeoning political acuity there will be a gentler end to her arc where her own innate sense of duty and her (now more discerning) sense of compassion will win out in the end when she takes back her name, identity, and birthright ... that she along with her surviving family will have justice administered in the name of their lost family and people... efficiently bringing down righteous and necessary judgement on those that harmed and betrayed them rather than simply dealing out some form of mass, bloody, cruel revenge on her enemies (I'll leave that for lady stoneheart) ... and that a satisfying ending for her and the other starks will balance them realistically addressing the dangers and betrayal they faced with their own personal resolve to hold true to the values imparted to them by their parents.

... yet after all her suffering (and the frustrating lack of trust, consideration, or support she was given by her own family in the later GOT seasons) there is something darkly appealing to the idea of her getting (not a hero precisely) but a ruthless and devoted sort of monster to support her and bring down unholy vengeance on her various tormentors

PART 4/4: THE RESULTING DRAMATIC AND EMOTIONAL APPEAL OF AEMONDSA FICS

This after their many parallels and complementary contrasts is what intrigues me the most...the interplay of a potentially wary, cautious, traumatized but still duty and justice oriented person and a companion or lover who is comparatively more ruthless, unhinged, capable of atrocities, and who is more equipped to dole out violence en masse... (guys the pipeline from dark jon/dark jonsa to aemondsa just makes so much sense)

the question in Aemondsa fics of what will win out in the end- the shared grief and rage or them both controlling/channeling such impulses into strategic righteous fury and justice is always fascinating... and most of all the idea of Sansa (after all the trauma mistreatment and grief she has experienced) attaining the interest and eventual devotion of someone who despite being capable of monstrous actions is also incredibly loyal, devoted, and ruthless in the pursuit of their loved ones interests ("I want you to put out your eye ... plan to make it a gift if it to my mother" indeed) is just as appealing as the idea where an isolated, lonely, traumatized, grieving, and dangerously angry young man like Aemond gets to find acceptance, affection, companionship, and belonging with an intelligent strategic but more importantly an exceptionally compassionate person like Sansa.

Its just a dynamic far too intriguing to ignore especially for someome who already loved Time Travel/Reincarnation Fix IT AUs in fanfiction

While emotional catharsis and Sansa returning home and having the dreams she had wrote off as impossible be fulfilled (i.e. building a loving partnership and marriage, having children with someone who loves and wants her more than her claim itself, reuniting with her family) is something I love- and what I want to happen in canon (hence my otp being Jonsa)- there is always an interesting/guilty pleasure aspect of fanfic where Sansa (or the Starks in general) get to wreck terrible bloody victory and vengeance on those who betrayed and butchered their family and people (not really the ultimate message or point of the book but definitely emotionally satisfying in fanfic)

Just like there is a sort of appeal that exists in hotd fanfic that is sort of the opposite ...ones that alter the violent senseless and tragic trajectory of the dance of dragons... to either change the course of a brutal civil war or prevent it all together

and the Aemondsa pairing's time travel or reincarnation fics provide an opportunity to explore both of these diverse dynamics.

Sansa will always deserve the world... in canon and in fanfic i want to see all her dream and hopes come true whether it is with a truly good and just partner with whom she gets to build the life and home she always dreamed of or through her getting her very own devoted monster who would do anything to keep her safe from the scores of people who wish to misuse or harm her

and I always wish that hotd fanfiction offered more Aemond centric fics with a love interest that you know actually likes, sympathizes with, or understand him? He feels too tragic a character for me to want him to experience the typical hate and love (enemies AND lovers) treatment he tends to get in fanfic... its not really satisfying for me seeing his typical pairing up with whatever team black character (or really TB character rewrite) or some Daemon's or Rhaenyra's daughter OC that is the frequent choice for aemond centric fics...him being portrayed as some impusive awful and villainous love interest who changes sides and abandons his family just to be with his lover/obsession feels so out of character in a way that erases the best, most compelling, and sympathetic parts of his canon personality, motives, and actions.

Luckily Aemondsa fics seems to be a pairing that offers everything I like in Ameond or Sansa centric fics....

In conclusion Aemondsa is surprisingly compelling and versatile dynamic in fanfic and I think that is why I've become such a fan of Firesteel/Aemondsa fanfiction (in a way I'm NOT at all a fan of the actual HOTD show writing lol)

I'm a proud support of crack ships/rarepairs and I'm always willing to add to the fandom appreciation of pairings that gets less attention or fandom related works... so expect to see the occasional Aemondsa fanart/fic recommendation post from me amongst my typical jonsa content (in fact expect one in the next in a day or so)

Otherwise I just hope established Ameondsa fans (or people who haven't ready any aemondsa fics but are fans of either character/curious about this pairing in general) have enjoyed seeing me fangirl about these two characters/this crack ship and feel inspired to check out or even make their own Aemondsa content!

-Crimsom Cold

42 notes · View notes