#like people with huge complex lives are typing to me and reading what I say so I have to think abt what I say!

[rutadales]

I think my least favorite thing that happens in fandom spaces is how overly familiar people act towards you. Like whenever I get a post over 200 notes I have people making jokes in the tags that aren't like outright distressing or gross or anything but that just. idk! are jokes I would only make with people I know. Like "fuck you!" or "oh this is awful" or whatever that's done in a joking tone but it's still weird. You don't know me like that

And it's not so much a problem over here because we are so insular as a community so even if I don't know you guys by name or if we don't follow each other I still recognize the person commenting on my stuff. enough to almost certainly recognize the joking tone instantly and for that familiarity there to be warranted. we're not friends but it's like, yeah! I know this person they've been here forever. It's comfortable.

But in larger spaces that casual familiarity is gone. I've literally never interacted with you before. It's like if you overheard a conversation on the street and just walked in and started joking around with them like you knew them. it's uncomfortable!! and like yes obviously I'm looking for interactions when I post and tag things that's the whole point, so it is inherently different than say a private conversation being intruded on but djakfoofjf just don't act like you know someone you've literally never engaged with at all before.

[nightcolorz]

Could you tell me your interpretation of why the Devil's minion split up after qotd? I only read up to that book and i've been learning through spoilers

omg I love this question! I personally think it was sort of an inevitability. Armand and Daniel were super unstable, on and off again-y while Daniel was human, and the binding factor that kept them together was that Armand was a vampire and Daniel was a human. Daniel can’t stay away from Armand for long because he’s obsessed and enthralled with everything monstrous and other about him (he’s also quite literally addicted to his blood). Daniel is so attached to Armand partly I think because he desperately wants to experience vampirism and after the affair with Louis he can’t see a reality for himself without vampirism in his life—whenever he tries to live normally he has that nagging reminder that their r supernatural wonderful things he will never be a part of and it drives him crazy.

Armand is in love with Daniel because he’s fascinated by all the things that make Daniel human. He considers him his link to the “modern age” and the thing that connects him to what he craves the most (humanity). Armand finds it very difficult to connect with people and by extension the world after how isolated he’s been for a good chunk of his immortality, and connection is very important to him. Daniel is how he experiences that. Armand also I think very much envies humans and wishes in a way to return to his humanity, and in this he finds experiencing humanity through daniel and seeing it in him very enthralling and special. Also Armand considers Daniel a mirror to how he was as a human (immature, lustful, brave, obsessed with the supernatural, doomed to failure), and Armand is very very frightened of seeing someone who he considers an embodiment of all he loves about humanity and a representative of the naivety he once had fall down his same path and loose it all to madness and immortal hell.

and obviously this is a huge issue!! Because Daniel loves Armand for his vampirism and Armand loves Daniel for his humanity, and both of them fundamentally want to abandon the thing the other prizes them for. But the tragedy there is that it’s not so superficial!! They also just love each other in a simpler, more personal sense. Daniel feels free with Armand, he feels like he can be the insane person he rlly is when they’re together. Armand gives Daniel access to the type of unhinged freedom and intense connection that he wants from life. He’s a walking subject Daniel can study, someone who never stops being fascinating (perfect for a journalist). And he loves his layers and his complexity, all the gross and horrible parts of him. Daniel first falls for Armand when he hears him genuinely laugh. <3, For armand, Daniel basically the only person who’s rlly ever seen him for who he is and loved him for it. Armand has a pattern of being shaped by people into something else, or misperceived and loved for that false image, and Daniel is in love with all the worst parts of armand. He loves him for everything he is, Daniel even says he’s an Armand expert lol. He sees it all and he loves it. And Armand is experiencing this type of unconditionality for the first time. There’s real connection there! The issue is that despite this so much of their relationship is built upon the vampire and human dynamic and it’s super hard to move past that.

The choice that Armand makes when he turns Daniel is “do I value Daniel more then I value his humanity and what that represents” and of course, Armand chooses Daniel, even tho it breaks him to do what he considers to be unforgivable to this person he loves so deeply. Armand vowed very early on that he would never turn a person into a vampire. And it’s cuz Armand rlly doesn’t like being a vampire 😭 He knows he wasn’t supposed to be a vampire, his maker goes around talking all the time about how armand was a mistake he should have never made and he’s fucked up bcus of how vampirism has affected him. And Armand knows that bcus of this he is a distortion of whatever person he could have been, and he’s always longing to understand part of what he’s missing. it’s rlly pretty sad. And so it makes sense that Armand would hate to take on the responsibility of, as he sees it, potentially ruining someone he loves. But he’d rather have Daniel alive than dead, so he turns him. Already this is hard on Armand bcus he considers it a selfish defeat to turn Daniel, choosing his own feelings over what he knows would be best for him. Daniel meanwhile is thrilled. Not off to a great start already

so Daniel was turned under insane circumstances and Armand and him have very little time to process any of it. Daniel is afraid to take life which isn’t abnormal in itself, but it freaks them both out. Once the insanity of queen of the damned settles down and Daniel and Armand r living together as a vampire x vampire couple at night island the issues begin to set in. There’s a huge disconnect now, Daniel is thrilled to be experiencing vampirism as he’s always wanted, Armand is grieving daniels humanity, neither of them r talking about it. Also, Daniel still has his addictive personality and his mental health issues which r exasperated by being a new vampire, so ofc he’s kind of loopy and kind of unstable. And Armand is realizing this and he’s thinking oh my god I’ve ruined Daniel I’ve destroyed the person I love the most, I’ve taken this person who I consider just like myself when I was a human and I’ve repeated the cycle of destruction, I destroy everything I touch oh my god. And I imagine this thought pattern led to Armand distancing himself from Daniel and being agitated and off putting, and I can say that being rlly excited about a change that ur partner is passive aggressively hostile about is like actual hell.

And the kicker!!! Armand’s primary mode of communication with his loved ones is the mind gift. It’s basically his safety net, in tvl it’s explained that Armand rarely ever talks out loud because he finds speaking through his mind much more comfortable. He uses the mind gift to express his feelings when he can’t with words, which is a pretty handy tool in a relationship when ur someone who struggles with verbal communication. But when Armand turns Daniel!! He can not communicate through the mind gift with him anymore!! So basically all these issues Armand is having and all this grief and stress and resentment is being left unsaid, and therefore unresolved. A couple can nottt get over an issue they aren���t talking about.

I imagine Armand felt like daniels vampirism was a huge barrier blocking him from ever connecting with him as he did ever again. Which!! Obviously Daniel will notice that Armand is giving up on him, and old patterns begin to resurface. They don’t have the “Daniel wants to be a vampire but Armand doesn’t want to turn him” argument anymore, but they do have a tension that is being left both unresolved and not understood by either party. All they know is the spark is fading and there’s resentment and there’s pain. And that tension, with these crazies, results in big blow out yelling matches and crying and “I’m leaving u for good this time I mean it!!”

so in conclusion, what I think happened with Daniel and Armand after qotd is that combined with his preexisting issues and his vampirism inflicted overstimulation, Armand’s bitterness and his distance drives Daniel to a mental break, and after some fight or another he leaves night island and vows to never return. Daniel is in a very vulnerable mental state as an already mentally ill new vampire. Vampirism has a very overwhelming effect on some people where the change to sensory processing makes it hard for some vampires to function fully on their on because of how difficult it is for them to process information. And daniels got that. I feel like he could have possibly made it through well with a strong support system, open communication, and guidance on how to navigate this new life, but obviously he didn’t have that.

When Daniel was a human he’d do this often, leaving, but then he’d realize he couldn’t live without Armand and come back. But when Daniel is so out of his mind he gets distracted by a light bulb or smth, he doesn’t come back. Maybe he would have if he was in his right mind, but he’s lost it and there’s not the safety net of Armand’s mind gift to come and locate him. So Marius finds him, decides that Armand is too broken and immature to ever care for his own fledgling, and he takes him in. And I figure that Armand’s guilt becomes unbearable after this, and he internalizes the assumption that he isn’t fit to have his own functioning relationships bcus of his issues, and he gives up on Daniel completely. Of course until the pl trilogy when they r able to re connect!

so yeah!! That’s my interpretation, loved this ask thank u for letting me yap. I hope this was coherent lol. Thank u sm!

[kunikame]

venus, planet of love. - mitsuki i.

warning(s) : hurt/comfort, mitsukis inferiority complex, i7 are the planets dont ask me why just read the fic, i love u izumi mitsuki u are so me w/c : 1619

you know love is real because izumi mitsuki exists, and he is full of it.

mitsuki loves many things – he loves iori, ZERO, re:vale, idolish7, his parents, the bakery, .. the list goes on endlessly, for izumi mitsuki is love itself. he is a lover through and through, he was raised with love enveloping him all around, and he spreads it around to everyone shamelessly and selflessly.

the only thing mitsuki doesn’t really love is himself – he is second. always, always second.

second to his genius younger brother, secondary to all his group members, always the kid picked last unless iori was the leader.

there was nothing particularly wrong with him that made it this way, he was, simply put, mediocre. a jack of all trades but master of none, if you will.

so you can imagine it didn’t quite surprise him to be less popular than his group mates by a huge margin. he didn’t stand out with anything, he had nothing for himself that would make him stand out – he wasn’t too likeable. he was aware of this, he has known this for a while – but it still hit him quite hard.

it was horrible, really, to see a light so bright become dim because it cannot see itself – it only sees the other lights, and becomes lost in their glow, mistakenly led to believe he does not shine at all.

it certainly does a number on the sight to gaze directly at the sun.

perhaps if he was brighter, if he was made of something different, he, too, would shine – would be loved.

you’ve always compared idolish7 to the planets in the sky, and fittingly so, as to you, a friend and fan, they are the center of a greater something. something only they can create, something that is tried and tested and truly theirs, because they shine brighter than all the stars combined, and because they deserve to have their place in the universe.

if nanase riku is the sun, a sense of purpose, then iori izumi is the moon, instinct. nikaido yamato is jupiter, expansion. nagi rokuya is saturn, responsibility. tamaki yotsuba is uranus, freedom. osaka sogo is mercury, adaptability. 

izumi mitsuki is venus, love.

for it is not love if it is not izumi mitsuki. it is not izumi mitsuki if it is not love.

you just wish he knew that.

which is exactly why when he got offers to mc on variety shows, you encouraged him to take them, to try them – maybe he’ll end up liking them. he is really funny, after all, a natural conversationalist. he is exactly the type variety mc’s like to interview the most, you’re almost certain he would be good at the job.

and he was – he was so good, in fact, he earned idolish7 their very own namesake show, with him as the mc.

he finally had something for himself, something that was purely his, something that defined and solidified his place in idolish7. something that made him irreplaceable.

seeing mitsuki try so earnestly and work so hard, you honestly didn’t know what to do. sometimes, you’d want to say “good luck!”, but other times you feel a “you don’t have to work so hard” would be better, as he was literally working himself to the bone to please everyone he possibly could – for what is he, if not love?

he never desired whatever side parts come with fame – he simply wanted to make people happy. that was his one true ambition, his goal. he doesn’t need anyone to love him, as long as they love the things he loves – as long as they love idolish7. it would sting, of course, to be left behind, to be unfavored, but he supposed he could live with that reality. he was finally accepted after all those failed auditions, he was doing what he loved, with the people he loved by his side.

he believed he could somehow get used to being disliked.

being disliked for doing something he loved however, that was a different story. 

he thought by mc-ing he could get closer to the others in popularity – and, from a certain point, it was true – his popularity did rise a bit, and he definitely did receive more fan letters and positive comments now, but the fated encounter and the unfortunate “he’s so annoying, i wish he would shut up” would continue to ring in his head for a long while to come.

he has just built up his confidence and stability like a fine tower of cards, fearing the slightest gust of wind lest it gets knocked off and tumbles onto his wooden desk in a messy pile – but instead, someone kicked the desk and the cards flew off and onto the cold, harsh ground, such a far distance off.

nagi had attempted to salvage the situation to the best of his ability, but lifting the cards off the ground isn’t going to rebuild the tower – mitsuki will have to do that himself.

handing him the cards while he does so was a simple act of kindness on your part.

“mitsuki?”

he startles mid stretch, an earbud falling out as he turns his head.

“[name]? what are you still doing here?”

“i was looking for you, then i ran into iori– he said i’d find you here,” you made your way over to sit next to him on the floor, sharing a look through the mirror facing you, “what are you doing here so late?”

“y’know, just practicing. gotta catch up and stuff, haha.”

“you’re already good enough as you are, mitsuki. you don’t need to chase after anything or anyone.”

he heaves an exhausted sigh, fiddling with the wires from his earbuds, “i do, though. i’m smaller than the others so i’m often off beat during the choreographies. i need to do more work to make sure i stay on.”

“you shouldn’t work so hard all the time. you’re tearing yourself apart trying to do this and that all at the same time – i understand your intentions, but i feel the way you’re going about them is going to bring you ruin in the end. as a friend first and fan second, i care for your health, and i don’t want to see you destroy yourself.”

“i’m not as good as them th–”

“yes, you are. you’re too absorbed in seeing them as the brightest lights to see yourself shining just as much as them. popularity polls don’t define who you are as a person, or how much you work, or how hard you try. the others know that, though, and so do i. we all see how much effort and care you put into your work, mitsuki – we know you pour out your heart and soul into everything you do, desperately trying to make it the best, trying to make people happy with you, and you do. the disapproving voices simply sound louder to you at this point in time, because those are the ones you’re most exposed to. it is however not hatred and dislike that kills entertainers, it’s love.”

the ginger listened attentively, taking your monologue in, dissecting it bit by bit. though he seems to disagree, he does understand your view and he respects it – he just doesn’t quite understand. he looks up at the mirror, staring in your eyes through it, and his seem to shimmer a tad more than they normally would under the studio lights.

“why love?”

the smile on your face feels a little melancholy, and again, he finds himself not understanding why.

“love can be overbearing and suffocating. sometimes we love things too much – so much we would kill just to keep them to ourselves. we destroy ourselves in an effort to make our loved ones happy or proud, completely blind to our surroundings becoming hazy and hard to navigate, and when you come to, you find you’re all alone in a room once filled with people. love changes, sometimes not in a good way. much like the stars burn up and disappear, the planets, too, will be destroyed by the sun,” you turn to him then, and there is a singular tear streaming down his face. you reach out to wipe it with your finger, and he blinks, “i don’t want to see that happen to you, because to me, you are love.”

“the destructive kind?”

“no, the beautiful kind. i see pieces of you in everything i hold dear, because i hold you dear.”

you see him smile for the first time that night, and it is beautiful, blindingly so – brighter than the white leds above his head. 

“i hold you dear, too.”

there’s a comfortable silence as you gaze at each other, the instrumental to their new song faintly heard from his long discarded earbuds on the floor.

“hey, did you know venus is the brightest planet naturally visible in the night sky?”

perhaps the planet of love itself was destroyed by being loved too much, but not izumi mitsuki – never izumi mitsuki.

izumi mitsuki loved many things. he loved iori, ZERO, re:vale, idolish7 – the list goes on. he was a lover, raised to love the things and people around himself.

“oh, really?”

but izumi mitsuki was also loved. loved by his fans, group mates, parents – by you.

the izumi mitsuki you knew had his love returned to him tenfold by his surroundings – be it the flowers his eyes linger on, the deep orange hues of the setting sun as they caress his face, the stray pets he feeds when he sees them – everything.

the izumi mitsuki you know is loved.

“yeah.”

maybe one day he will learn to love himself, too. 

ੈ✩₊˚TAGLIST : @gabirii //ask/comment or fill form to be added/removed! (if you’re in bold i can’t tag you)

[thesweetnessofspring]

In Catching Fire during the beach scene, Peeta tells Katniss that nobody needs him. Do you think he meant that in a practical sense? As in, nobody needed him to provide for them. His family had their own business so they didn’t rely on his earnings to survive. Or do you think he meant that nobody cared for him that much? Or maybe a little bit of both? I realize that the Mellark family dynamic is an enigma, but some people often use the fact that Peeta’s brother didn’t volunteer for him and that Peeta lived alone afterwards to validate their theories that he didn’t have the best relationship with his family.

Personally, I think people are too hard on Peeta’s brother. Katniss herself says that what she did was the radical thing. Being reaped was basically a death sentence. Moreover, it actually makes sense that Peeta’s family didn’t move in with him since they had a business to run and it wouldn’t make sense to change its location. I’ve also seen people that think the Mr. Mellark chose to say goodbye to Katniss and give her the cookies instead of seeing his own son which is wild to me? I always thought he had gone to visit Katniss only after saying goodbye to Peeta. There are so many theories about his family that baffle me tbh His mother is a whole different thing though, I dislike her so much that I don’t think I can be objective about her and probably there was even more estrangement between Peeta and her after he returned from the games. Anyways, this already got so long 😅 just wanted to know what you thought about this subject. Thank you 😊

Hi non, very interesting thoughts! I really love thinking about the Mellark family, because I think they must have a very complex and interesting dynamic.

What Katniss has to say is:

It's true his family doesn't need him. They will mourn him, as will a handful of friends. But they will get on. Even Haymitch, with the help of a lot of white liquor, will get on. I realize only one person will be damaged beyond repair if Peeta dies. Me.

So at least from Katniss's perspective, this "need" is emotional as well as physical. In terms of the traditional Maslow's hierarchy of needs, not even Katniss needs Peeta. And yet, for her, Peeta is at the base of her needs (my personal model of hierarchy of needs has attachment at its base even before food and shelter). And yes, I do think that Peeta has a similar read on the situation as Katniss. In part because I see Peeta as a Type 2 on the Enneagram, which to sum it up very simply, is to have the core fear of being unloved. Given his nature and the environment in which he was raised, I don't think Peeta ever felt completely, truly loved probably until he finally asked Katniss at the very end of Mockingjay. So with that, he came to a similar conclusion as Katniss, that his family would mourn him and miss him, but they would be able to move on.

I do think people are too hard on Peeta's brother who didn't volunteer. It's a disservice to every sibling who could have volunteered but didn't. No one else seems to blame him, not even Katniss. And the idea that Mr. Mellark didn't see his son for one last time is frankly absurd. Peeta was surprised his father visited Katniss, but not hurt like when he talked about his mother basically betting on Katniss. However, I do think that them not moving in with Peeta is a really bad sign. As a Type 2, Peeta might have pushed them out, but can you honestly say that if you had a sixteen-year-old son or little brother who just got back from the Games and lost his leg, you wouldn't move in just to comfort him? Even if you had to wake up twenty minutes early to walk into work? To me, the fact that Peeta lives alone at 16 is a huge, huge sign that all was not well with the Mellark family.

I'll say that we know basically nothing about Peeta's brothers. Everything one comes up with about them is complete fanon and headcanons, except for general ages and the fact that the second Mellark brother won the wrestling championship match against Peeta. From what we see of his parents, the picture does not look good for the whole of the Mellark family. With Mrs. Mellark being presented as the aggressor of DV, the other family roles likely correspond in some way in response to the abuse. I think that based on what we know of Peeta's character, he was a bit of the Caregiver (natural for his diplomatic and caretaking/Type 2 nature) and the Scapegoat (for his mother's treatment of him, his streak of rebelliousness, and that this role was especially amped up post-Games with his PTSD). I headcanon the middle brother as the Golden Child (Mrs. Mellark's favorite and most like her) and the oldest as The Hero (keeping everything looking good on the outside). While not a child, Mr. Mellark inhabits the Lost Child role (ignoring the problem/avoiding causing problems).

I once had someone who had an alcoholic mother tell me "My mom was the best mom until 5pm and she started drinking" and I think that carries over with the Mellarks. Did they have fun together, show kindness, and have family moments? I'm sure. But did they have a dysfunctional dynamic exacerbated by the oppressive system they lived under? If we look at the text, I'm pretty sure of that, too. Honestly, I think that more than putting his memories of Katniss back together, the real struggle for Peeta will be putting back the memories of his family.

Thank you for the ask, non! I really do love talking about the Mellarks, even if it's some pretty depressing stuff.

[chrkrose]

Okay so just a rando ask, I was reading through the posts on your page,, and I came to thinking

If daemon truly abandoned Rhaenyra, why didn't he just run away with nettles? Why did he have to still fight for team black when he could have just flown else where with her? Rhaenyra would have met her own end inevitably. I’m no daemyra shipper, I’m not a daemon fan either it just doesn't add up. He sacrificed his life to get rid of the biggest threat of team green? Wouldn't it be fair to assume it was for Rhaenyra? Or atleast his children.

Now this is just my personal opinion, he loved nettles, yes (she's awesome who wouldn't 😩) but he also bore some love for Rhaenyra (she’s mommy🥰) as well. He chose to let go of nettles to protect her because he loved her. He chose to fight for Rhaenyra because in the end of the day he loved her and wanted to prove his loyalty to her (but wasn’t actually faithful lol)

Daemon in his Katherine era 💀💀💀💅 blurry ass pic

He died for her cause if not for her in the end of the day. Well atleast that’s what I think 🤷‍♀️🤷‍♀️🤷‍♀️

I don’t believe in the theory that he fled with nettles, it just sort of feels out of character for him, to leave his children, Aegon the younger in the clutches of Aegon ii. Daemon imo would scream his head off if he knew his first born son was captured by Aegon ii, and somehow work up some scheme to get back into the game and possibly overthrow Aegon ii. And it just seems unlikely he survived the fall as well. 

Daemon is a complicated and morally grey character, but like any character he has his merits and he has his flaws. I think his love life would be as complex as he is, conflicted by both duty and love.

I hope I make sense lol, I want to know your thoughts.

Ok, so first thanks for being normal even if you have a different opinion. Usually, I always get a bunch of people screaming at me lmao. It's cool to have rational discussions even if in the end the parts just agree in disagree. Now, back to the points you brought. I still disagree lol. Imo, Daemon didn't die for the cause, much less for Rhaenyra or his children. I'm gonna break down why I think this argument makes no sense whatsoever:

Fire & Blood never implies that Daemon had a close relationship or even cared that much for his children. He didn't hate them or anything, but we have no canon basis to say he was a fatherly type where he thought of his children that much or was willing to make huge sacrifices for them. This is fandom projection 101. So to say he did what he did thinking of his children is a stretch IMO.

Aemond wasn't Rhaenyra's biggest threat at the time. Her biggest threat was Daeron and the Southron army he had assembled. It's canon. "And yet, the greatest threat to Rhaenyra's reign was not Aemond One-Eye, but his younger brother, Prince Daeron The Daring, and the great southron army led by Lord Ormund Hightower." And that was before Ulf and Hugh's betrayal and before Rhaenyra alienated Addam by declaring him a traitor as well. So even if Rhaenyra didn't say anything about that in the letter to Daemon (which I doubt, since she was sending the letter to demand Nettles' death, so she sure talked about the dragonseeds' betrayal), Daemon knew about that already. He knew that without him, she was fucked, because she would have only Tyraxes and Syraxes on Team Black's side, and you can exclude Syraxes since Rhaenyra wouldn't go into battle. He knew all of that. He still chose to die anyway.

About running away with Nettles, a few things to consider. As long as he was with Nettles, she wouldn't be safe. If he runs away with her and Rhaenyra somehow wins the war, she will send for him. He would be a traitor, she'd never forgive that. If Rhaenyra loses, Team Green is definitely going after him. He would be a threat to the throne, they would never let them live. The best way to protect Nettles is to send her away alone. Besides that, regardless of what happened, if he ran away with her, he would never be able to return home and I doubt Daemon was keen on living on the run forever. It doesn't fit him.

It seemed like he was tired of war, tired of the scheming, tired of fighting. Even before I reached the point where he makes the decisions he makes, I felt his narrative shifting, and his time in Maidenpool with Nettles looked much more like a vacation to him and a respite than a mission. He seemed happy with Nettles, and happy with that bubble he created for them, but once reality burst that, he seemed done with everything. This is also sort of corroborated by his dialogue with Aemond, where he agrees he has lived for too long.

The narrative in any way frames his final battle with Aemond as something he is doing for the cause. Daemon might have gone through a somewhat redemption arc, but he's still very much a selfish man and someone who would never go down in any other way than not an epic way because he is "the rogue prince". His showdown with Aemond is written as something about both of them as characters whose arcs are mirrored at every turn, finally culminating in their final encounter, and written as Daemon's big send-off.

The narrative specifically frames his final act as a betrayal through Rhaenyra's lens, further corroborating all that was set up before, something that is narratively satisfying to the reader because at this point she's very much the villain instead of the hero. We have seen her burning bridges, behaving poorly with the smallfolk, and being unfair with allies, culminating in her acts against Addam, Nettles, and Corlys, and overestimating her hand to the point of being arrogant in her certainty that Daemon would come back to be with her after murdering an innocent woman. Until this point, Daemon and Nettles have been written as a romantic arc, one that ends in heartbreak, specifically because of Rhaenyra. So we have this moment of satisfaction when Rhaenyra realizes that even though she did everything she did, and she was so certain she would win, she actually lost. He left her. He betrayed her.

The story leaving the "possibility" that Daemon could have survived and gone to find his way toward Nettles serves to show where his loyalty truly lies, and where his heart is, in life or death. If anything, to believe he went on a suicide mission because he couldn't stand being apart from Nettles is a much more acceptable and logical conclusion of his final choices than the bizarre cope that is the "he died for Rhaenyra, for his children, or for the cause".

Finally, I don't think he loved both because I don't think he ever loved Rhaenyra tbh. Not like he loved Nettles or Laena. An argument can be made that he loves Rhaenyra in the show adaptation (although I disagree about that medium, but this is for another post). But in the book, it's very clear that she's not on top or even second in his list of "women I romantically loved most in my criminal life". I say Nettles comes first because his love for her seemed to come from a genuine place of wonderment and affection, with no hidden agenda behind it. Laena comes close behind because even though we don't know if he indeed fell for her or if he married her to advance politically after his recent downfall from power at the time, he clearly came to love her very much in the years they were together and was happy in their marriage. I say even Mysaria might come first to him than Rhaenyra, he clearly cared for her for a while and was very upset when they lost their baby. The only person beneath Rhaenyra is Rhea because he clearly hates Rhea. In the books, Daemon groomed and wanted to use Rhaenyra to get back at his brother/get closer to the throne and later they combined their shared vision and aligned political ambitions in a marriage that was beneficial to both of them. Obviously, there was physical attraction (and co-dependency on Rhaenyra's part), but love? I don't think so.

[princesscolumbia]

Ranma 1/2 Thoughts, Meta Edition

I have consumed...a lot of Ranma 1/2 content.

I mean, this is kinda what happens when you're a repressed transgirl who discovers the manga a year into a marriage that you got into to "fix" being trans and be "a real boy" in a desperate bid to fill the hole that you wouldn't learn for two decades could only be filled by living as your true self.

I've encountered precisely four (4) types of Ranma 1/2 fans in that time:

Transwomen who see Ranma as their idealized expression of the gender experience ("I'm not like this because I want to be, it's a curse. A curse that gives me a smokin' hot body and HUGE tits! But it's tooootally a curse, for realsies! I'll find a cure any day now, see how hard I'm looking? I'm trying sooooo hard to find a cure...")

Transmen who see Ranma as their perfect representation of their gender experience ("I'm a guy, damnit! This body...it's a curse! I hate it and I want nothing better than to be cured, but all sorts of Life Bullshit keeps getting in the way!")

Lesbians who kin either Ranma (butch NB lesbian) or one of their love interests (Akane - comphet closetted butch lesbian, Shampoo - Strong, smokin' hot bad bitch who goes after what she wants, Ukyo - transmasc coded genderfluid NB)

Completely clueless nimrods who miss the FUCKING POINT and are only into the show for the martial arts and think it would be better if Ranma got cured and they stopped having funny stuff happen.

(In case it's not obvious, IMHO the last group are the worst parts of the fandom and need to Go Away. Most of the toxic stuff that exists in R.5 fanspaces is because of this group of assholes which includes the incels that think everything would be better if Ranma just did stuff that's questionable from an ethics and morality perspective and chased after Shampoo because she's the closest thing to a Barbie-doll these closet fascists can allow themselves to fantasize about playing with, completely ignoring that she's a complex character that's a subversive pastiche to the Japanese racist stereotypes of the 1980s.)

I'm not kidding when I say that in the early days of the public Internet (before Facebook and Twitter ruined it for everyone), Ranma 1/2 was the SINGLE largest fandom by a MASSIVE stretch. I once checked my math on this by going to Fanfiction.net (before the massive purges) and brought up the Big List of All Fandoms and right there at the top with a MASSIVE number of fics was Ranma 1/2 by a HUGE margin. It took three fandoms (Star Trek, Doctor Who, and I believe Naruto if I'm recalling correctly) to have their combined total number of fics exceed the number of R.5 fics on FF.net...and that was JUST FF.net. There was an entire separate index (The Penultimate Ranma 1/2 Fanfic Index) that had the single task of listing, not even curating or reading or reviewing, ONLY Ranma 1/2 fanfics. Not fanart, not commentary, no RP blogs or chat transcripts or whatever, JUST fanfics. And only about half of those linked to FF.net, meaning that if you dig up the archives you'll find at least 60% of all fanfics that people had managed to index in the Ranma 1/2 fandom are missing because they were never properly archived and just...faded from the Internet as the public servers and places like Geocities started disappearing. You can find teasing, tantalizing hints of larger works that all we have left, like scraps of ancient papyri revealing a quote from a missing book of the Bible, are single chapters backed up on niche sites that managed to get spider-crawled by Archive.org, but many great works are just...lost. (There's an ero fic called "Playing with Water" that was SUPER hot and featured elements that we have tags for on porn sites but didn't really have proper words for back in the day...but even back when it was first being written finding the thing was hard...and today? Nearly impossible.)

(If you wonder why I'm such an absolute RABID advocate of AO3, this is why)

For me, Ranma will always be the transfemme coded genderfluid hero that we needed in the late 80s and early 90s. We were on the tail end of the AIDS pandemic, and just like COVID-19 there were a bunch of assholes who used it to ride to power and marginalize queer folk. It was easier to do with AIDS, of course, given the absolutely massive numbers of queer cis men and transwomen who contracted it and died. (Sidebar: the reason "L" comes first in "LGBTQIA+" is because it was the Lesbian nurses who were the caretakers of the Gay men who were dying in numbers large enough to be counted as a tragic statistic instead of a mere tragedy) and while the world was starting to acknowledge (again) that gay men was a thing that existed and they weren't actually trying to corrupt the youth, what we now call "transgender" was still listed in the DSM as a mental disorder that required treatment to "cure." According to the cultural majority in damn near every field you can imagine, the Gender Binary was the only way to exist and if you didn't fit neatly into one or the other then you were Damaged™ and had to be Fixed™ for The Good of All People™ (but specifically so cis-het-white folks, usually men, could feel comfy and not be confronted by things that made them feel icky and might have cooties). It's a truism that's treated as a joke that transwomen get into coding and wind up doing IT work in such massive numbers that between us and the furries we ARE the foundation of the modern Internet. And into the fanspaces packed to the brim with closetted AMAB transwomen who hadn't yet had their egg cracked came this plucky martial artist that gets to swap their gender with a splash of water but somehow still winds up the best of the best, the finest martial artist of their generation. (Goku can suck it, Ranma would turn the Kamea-meha right back on the over-muscled, braindead loser with a food fetish and still make it home in time for Kasumi's dinner)

I'm no sociologist, anthropologist, behaviorist, whatever, but I suspect that the reason Ranma Saotome spawned such a large fanbase so early in the modern Internet's history was specifically because the series created a safe space where people could talk about gender issues with a degree of separation that helped strip away the stigma surrounding feeling like you were in the wrong body.

I get why people like the martial arts aspect. I mean, Ranma kills a demigod. This is NOT something to sneeze at. I also understand the transmen who latch onto Ranma as a kin because I get the feeling like you have no control over what your body's doing and you're going through your days in existential dread of what might be dragging you further and further away from what you always knew was right and correct about yourself. It's a terrifying thing and here's someone who (esp. the anime version) IS a guy trapped in a girl's body.

For me, though, and for a LOT of transwomen out there, Ranma is transfemme. And, yes, canonically Ranma states right near the end of the manga that they're both and they kinda forgot about the 'cure' when they had to pick between that and the really important stuff and that they're okay with being fluid ('cause water, gettit?!) about their gender and it's a damn shame this was the 80s 'cause a continuation might wind up showing Ranma embracing being both...

BUT, and this is a transfemme thing, I know, if you continue the parabolic arc of Ranma's character development, the logical conclusion (for us) is that she eventually decides that she's a woman and just lives in her "cursed" form the majority (or all) of the time.

And yes, this is because that's the transfemme story arc. In the manga in some distant part of the multiverse that peers into our universe and for some reason decides to make me the MC (god, that must be a FUCKING BORING manga by our standards, I weep for those fans), my story arc is the gradual progression of uncracked, closetted transgirl to transitioned out and proud transbien mom. At one point I swapped back and forth between gender presentations because it was safer for me to appear in some spaces as the male that they thought I was. Now I would prefer to die before being forced to go back to pretending to be a man again.

Ranma has the choice, and good for them. Until the Kaisufuu is permanently destroyed, even if the "curse" is locked, they have the option of going one way or the other based solely on their own, personal desire. I can't say I'd be comfortable with that option being available. In that theoretical manga where there's a reboot that gives me a condition like Ranma's, I'd probably wind up destroying the equivalent to the Kaisufuu just because of the threat to my mental wellbeing it presents.

So it's not a stretch to imagine Ranma making the same choice. She's a woman now, she has the life she never realized she wanted because she never had the choice so didn't know she was allowed to imagine it, but now she's happier than ever and why would she ever go back to that struggle of being a guy that only ever brought her pain and challenges and heartache?

[mbti-notes]

Anon wrote: Helloo, I'm a 24 year old INTP woman. I've been reading your blog for 6 years now. Back then I knew about type but not typology and cognitive functions. Your blog made everything very clear, as well as fascinating, so thank you very much for that.

I was interested in psychology, because I felt inadequate then and had a hard time relating to people. I wanted to achieve a lot so I knew I had to work on my weaknesses first, to balance everything. MBTI theory showed me exactly what those were. The stress was big too at the time, I was alone, abroad for my studies and I'm from a third world country, the adaptation was hard and I struggled a lot with that as well as other hardships due to material conditions.

Anyway, for years I've read some of your recommendations and digged deeper into the human's psyche. Into psychology and social sciences as a whole, even though I'm in a STEM field. I tried my best to work on my emotional intelligence and really choose a career path taking into consideration my type and aspirations, even going against my parents will to do so.

Since I've been working on this for so long and with awareness, I'd like to test my maturity, what can I do to know if I'm well-developed ? If I have a good grasp of my functions ? If I worked through my traumas ? Them, being beaten for the slightest thing as a kid. I'd love to tell myself that I do, but I don't think I have enough perspective to test it objectively, so what do you think?

Thanks a lot in advance, you're really doing an amazing work, stumbling upon your blog felt like finding a hidden treasure in some lost island in the vast ocean. One must be lucky and aware of its value to recognise the remarkable craftsmanship you put into it. You have my admiration for that. Wishing you the best in life 🙌

----------------------

I appreciate your kind compliments. Funnily enough, I also treat my blog as a hidden treasure chest of sorts. It's a place I stash gems and pearls (of wisdom) that I've picked up. I make them rediscoverable rather than just leaving them in the junk drawer of my mind, lol.

The way you frame the question is rather narrow given that "maturity" is quite a big and complex concept. If your question was sparked by reading the ego development section, there are reliable ways to assess it, but doing so isn't likely to provide you with useful information. There are a wide variety of factors that influence maturity, so it's not something that can be changed through sheer force of will. The process of maturation must be respected and allowed to progress at its own pace, rather than forced toward some imagined result.

Because maturity is such a huge topic, I'll limit the discussion to what I believe is relevant to INTPs. One thing I've noticed is that INTPs tend to confuse "development" and "growth". To be fair, these two words are often used interchangeably and their definitions can be quite vague in psychology. I'll explain how I distinguish them:

Development is about improvement of your ability to make good use of the inner resources you already possess. These resources include things like your talents, skills, and constructive traits that help you reach important goals or milestones in life.

Growth is about transformation, which usually involves a dramatic change to your attitude, perspective, worldview, or self-concept. When you "grow as a person", there is a significant shift in how you conduct yourself or live your life.

If you're science oriented, you can think of development as doing things to increase mechanical efficiency and quantifying the progress, whereas growth is like an unpredictable chemical reaction that creates a qualitatively new state of being. To distinguish development and growth in this way is not to say that they are separate. Purposeful self-development is one important factor that contributes to growth, but it is not enough in itself to cause growth. When INTPs believe that development is the same as growth, they hit an invisible wall as soon as they possess enough self-confidence to handle most of life's problems. What are they missing? Making good use of intellectual abilities, materializing talents, and improving skills will certainly help you be a more capable or competent person, but it doesn't necessarily help you grow into a more mature person.

Maturity (as defined by the stages of ego development) isn't a skill you can work on systematically like math or violin, and it isn't even an end goal in itself. Maturity is a side-effect of sustained psychological growth. If you want to know how to become more mature, then a focus on self-development isn't enough, it is also necessary to understand what spurs psychological growth.

If growth is like a chemical reaction that creates a qualitatively new state of being, then an important aspect of growth is actively exposing yourself to new experiences that have the potential to alter your psychology. Such experiences could be as simple as changing up a stale daily routine or as complex as moving to a completely foreign country. The key point is you are continuously learning new and important life lessons. This is why greater maturity also implies greater wisdom. Wisdom isn't just about what you know or how much you know; it's about being able to apply what you know with enough nuance, sophistication, and adaptability to create objectively good or beneficial results in everything you do.

Another difference between development and growth is there could be one method of development that works for many people for self-improvement, but there is no simple formula for growth. A new experience that significantly alters your psychology might have no effect whatsoever on mine. Why? Each person has their own unique lessons to learn based on what's happening deep in their unique psychology.

If you must learn from life experience in order to become mature and wise, then is it worthwhile to control what kinds of life experiences you have? Yes and no. Oftentimes, the experiences that provide the most opportunities for learning are the ones you find most challenging. Challenges usually bring some pain, so people tend to avoid them rather than use them as opportunities for growth. You shouldn't just randomly take on each and every challenge you see, but you also shouldn't exert such extreme control over your life that you miss out on unexpected or fortuitous challenges that would spur growth. The challenges you get to control are things like: pursuing higher education; stepping out of your comfort zones; confronting painful memories; talking to people you disagree with; etc. The challenges you don't get to control are things like being born into a dysfunctional family or suffering a tragic loss. Unexpected challenges are just as, if not more, important because they strongly compel you to build strength and resilience.

The advantage of knowing type theory is you get to know yourself better, especially when it comes to being aware of the challenges that you inflict upon yourself because of flawed perception and judgment. Being able to spot the weaknesses of your personality opens up many opportunities for learning and growth.

Are you able to identify all your patterns of function misuse? What do those patterns tell you about your challenges?

Are you successfully minimizing/mitigating instances of function misuse in your everyday life, i.e., meeting your challenges?

Are you able to use your functions optimally, i.e., to apply them appropriately and wisely to form a healthy relationship between yourself and the world?

Have you built up a healthy sense of self and practice proper self-care through introverted function development?

Have you learned how to adapt well to your environment(s) through extraverted function development?

Are you striking a good balance between the introverted and extraverted sides of your personality (i.e. neither is extreme)?

If you are on the right track in type development, life doesn't necessarily get easier, but you become much more adaptable to life's challenges. The results you get should speak for themselves.

If you are a mentally healthy individual, the desire for progress and growth never really ends, so it's natural to wonder about what more there is for you, especially in times when life is going relatively well. However, asking how to "test" yourself is kind of a suspicious question to me because it makes me wonder what the underlying motivation is. Sometimes, it's an indication that there's something wrong with the approach. A "test" implies there's a formula, but maturity doesn't work that way. You say you don't have the perspective to test yourself objectively? That is precisely how you know you have more maturing to do. When your perspective seems too small, then there's something you need to learn in order to broaden it. But I can't tell you exactly what that something is. You'll know it the next time you experience true growth. To paraphrase Kierkegaard: Life can only be understood backwards; but it must be lived forwards. This is the difficulty of being human.

What I can say is, at 24, you haven't lived much. You've still got much more ahead of you than behind you. You have a lot of lessons yet to learn. Personality type only tells you that some of those lessons have to do with your functions. But the rest is unpredictable. Some lessons come with the mistakes you'll inevitably make throughout life. Yet more lessons will come with the ups and downs of fate. And even more lessons will come as you get much older and gradually lose all the things you hold most dear.

If you want, I can give you some questions to reflect on for building self-awareness. Maybe some of them can lead you toward growth.

What sorts of thoughts frequently run through your head?

What feelings do you frequently experience?

What is your overall mood most of the time?

Are you aware of your needs and do you attend to them well? Are you aware that you have physical, emotional, cognitive, social, esteem, aesthetic, spiritual, and transcendent needs?

Are you aware of your passions and joys and give yourself enough space to experience them regularly?

Are you aware of your wants and desires? Are you able to explain where they come from or what motivates them?

Are you aware of your identity? Are you able to describe the things that define you as an individual? Are you able to explain how those things came to define you?

Are you aware of your worth? Are you able to describe your method of appraising/evaluating yourself, explain why you use that method (and not some other method), and justify that it is a good method?

Are you aware of how you are perceived by others? Are you able to express yourself authentically? Are you able to recognize and respect the authentic expressions of others?

Are you aware of the roles/positions you occupy in society? Are you aware of how those roles/positions affect your relationships with the people around you? Are you aware of all the duties, obligations, and responsibilities you have to yourself and others?

Are you aware of your moral values and how well you abide by them? Are you able to explain how you came to adopt them?

Are you aware of your core beliefs about how the world works? Are you able to explain how they came into being and how they influence your behavior?

Are you aware of the criteria/standards you use to define "success"? Are you able to explain their origin and justify them as being the most appropriate criteria/standards to use?

Are you aware of your aspirations? Are you able to explain why you've set the life goals you have previously pursued, are pursuing now, or will pursue in the future?

Are you aware of your potential? Do you have an ideal self that you wish to become? If so, are you able to explain how you came to construct that image of yourself? Are you able to envision more than one possibility for expressing who you are (other than what you are at present)?

Are you aware of your guiding principle/philosophy of life? Are you able to explain where it came from or why you chose it?

Mature people understand themselves more deeply than the average person. Depth of self-knowledge is necessary for making wise decisions in life. When you have meta-awareness of yourself, such as your needs, desires, preferences, strengths, weaknesses, motivations, biases, etc, you'll eventually be able to transcend your subjectivity as needed in order to operate more objectively. When your perspective seems too small (i.e. subjective) as an INTP, then you ought to use Ne to actively expose yourself to new knowledge/experiences that expand your horizons. By doing this, you should eventually encounter challenges that spark growth reactions.

[panelshowsource]

could you make a post about all the books from comedians you own/have ordered and which are your favorites I want to buy all of them but don't know where to start ++++++++ would love to know if you know of a way to order a signed copy of David's book if I don't live in the UK

you know, in a stroke of what may be relevant information, i'm actually an editorial director by day and even used to be a literary agent here in nyc — none of which is obvious on account of my billion rushed typos and...just...general existence :) (i promise i'm supremely carefully handed in my editing!!! and have a lot of resources, at my job hahahahaha oh god maybe i shouldn't have mentioned this!!!) — but i'm really no book critic and have no idea how my tastes stack up against what a lot of you are looking for. i'm happy to share some of my general, poorly articulated internet thoughts but it may be more worth checking out goodreads or talking with others who have more experience with autobiographies (which a majority of these types of books are)!

to begin with a disclaimer, one of my friends texted me recently, "why do you only watch sad movies?" i love sad films, sad music, i love to cry, catharsis, sentimentality which is always a little self-indulgent. it's a bit ironic, because this is a comedy blog and you guys know me as someone who loves to find things to laugh about and i fill my life with so much silliness through his huge, life-long hobby, but, all the same, that is only one side of me, i guess. i'm saying this now because you're about to hear me talk briefly about a few somewhat-to-incredibly sad books and be like "oh i didn't know this what i was getting into" 😅

books i do recommend:

just ignore him by alan davies — this isn't a book review but i am self-conscious about just how i describe this book, because it's so sensitive and i carry a lot of respect for alan. at the time of publication, alan actually didn't want any of the press to know and/or discuss the most tragic elements of the book, so readers wouldn't be influenced in any direction before confronting it themselves. (it's okay to talk about now of course, and anyone should know there are major trigger warnings for death, child abuse, sexual abuse, and pedophilia.) it is a sad book about his earliest years: the complexities and nuances of male power and manipulation, of unimaginable loneliness, of a lost child. alan said it wasn't cathartic to write—that is was indeed very painful—but the vulnerability, the commitment to shirking himself of the painful silence he endured for most of his life, is exceptionally moving. alan's writing can be quite thorough, even flowery, in creating vivid places and images, so so much of the heaviness feels piercing and even disturbing. if you read other comedians' books, a decent majority of them are written in the style of standup or, say, a ted talk — with performance in mind, specific structures and beats that mimic how they'd tell these stories on stage. i would argue this is quite different to that, that while the writing is in a style and structure that benefits being read aloud this is a very different alan to alan the performer. and, very honestly, i'm really not an audiobook person, not to mention listening is a wholly different experience to reading — but the audiobook for this is phenomenal: alan narrates and, while of course it's his story so he'll tell it best, he is a very gentle, thoughtful storyteller. this will be you by chapter 4:

moab is my washpot + fry chronicles by stephen fry — the first and second of his three autobiographies covering some of the most sensational times (stephen is willing to admit) of his childhood and teen years + his rise to fame through the cambridge footlights. these are good reads for 1) stephen fry fans duh and 2) people who can enjoy the inspiration of auden, waugh, wilde, wodehouse, quintessential english writers who inform the foundation of stephen's relationship with literature and appreciation. stephen is painfully honest — and often sorry for it, apologising for what he perceives to be his shortcomings — and you can't help but feel, even early on in the first book, that his view of his own world is somehow even more subjective than everyone else's views of their own worlds. maybe it's because he's so judgmental, maybe it's his oscillating mental health, maybe it's the shocking thrust with which he was confronted with the wideness of the world...i'm not sure, but stephen's life through stephen's eyes is so very stephen-y. i think that's why we love him‚ though i can see some people loathing the less admirable sides of him, which he does show, so don't read this if you want to maintain some image of him that helps you cope or keeps you perfectly entertained. if you're not british, the fry chronicles is an especially good read to scratch some of your anglophilic interests (lotsss of namedropping and backstage chat)!

delicacy: a memoir about cake and death by katy wix — one of my recent faves and another book that isn't thoroughly funny. told in 21 vignettes either centered around or vaguely related to cake, katy talks about her school life, grief and loss, self-esteem and body image, misogyny — in ways that are just...matter of fact...opposed to lessons learned or things she's working on through therapy. she's accepted a lot, but she's also afflicted by a lot to this day; she's capably honest about where her reality stands. for this reason, it can be a bleak and certainly very raw read. i listened to the audiobook for this one, which was nice, but i much recommend the actual written book as the vignettes are in different formats (short story prose, letters, email exchanges) that often anchor time and place, intention, even the little peeks of light of comedy. katy's writing is very lovely, both my heart and mind were touched.

back story by david mitchell — a mildly vulnerable, moderately insightful, and quite humorous exploration of david's up-and-coming years. i really appreciate the premise — due a bad back and sciatica, he begins taking very long walks every day, and these walks trigger memories and anecdotes as he passes certain places — that really doesn't come off as a gimmick. it's a very easy read (or listen) and what i'd consider an uncomplicated, unproblematic bio, but it would be difficult to enjoy if you're only a casual fan of david mitchell or only like him in his most recent dad years, as it was written in his peep show heyday and is so much about those years of his life, his relationship with robert webb, etc. a good intro-to-the-genre book and the very first britcom book i read way back in 2010!

i also really enjoy graham norton's books — especially for the goss, but he's a great writer and his debut fiction novel got quite good reviews! — and tim key's books of poetry, though you really need to be a fan of tim key to read tim key :')

books i do not recommend:

before & laughter by jimmy carr — this book is much less of an autobiography (details are scant and anecdotes are few; it's cute when he refers to karoline as "my girl") and much more a collection of 1) jimmy's interpretation of contemporary comedy and what it means to be a comedian, and 2) how that journey, and his evolving attitudes, shaped him + became advice he would offer to others. this is why he calls the book adjacent to self help & motivational speaking. i don't think it teaches you anything new about him — literally or as a writer — so i don't recommend reading it, though the audiobook (where he's truly performing the writing like a ted talk) is an easy listen. a lot of people will not understand that jimmy is overwhelmingly sincere in regards to all of the topics and personal philosophies the jimmy nearing 50 espouses. he's someone with very studied, thorough personal philosophies (if you've seen him on podcasts talking about his life and career then you'll know just what i mean) and he explains them deftly, but they can feel a bit...how should i say this...flat to people who have heard a lot of it before, in hollywood movies or from their own parents or wherever. he didn't write this just for another stream of income — he is passionate about these conversations and that counts for something. overall i already knew a bit about the guy and didn't need this.

my shit life so far by frankie boyle — i have never read one of frankie's fiction novels (crime is really not my thing, so someone needs to let me know if richard osman's book series is a smash because i'm only going to check them out if i'm convinced to), but as a long-time fan of his, knowing how much of a wordsmith he is, and how intentional he is in everything he says, i was surprised by how dull i found this. his shit life was just that — uninteresting, meandering. his anecdotes may have worked better aloud than on paper, but they didn't grab me. you learn a bit about his young adulthood, but like jimmy he's intensely private and i could feel that distance between us even while reading an autobiography. it didn't work for me, super sad about it :(

can everyone please calm down? by mae martin — instead of criticising this book, i'd rather just make a disclaimer or two. if you are already engaged in queer discourses and dialogues, you are not going to learn very much from this book. both the descriptive writing and presentation of research is "accessible" to the point i'd call it more adjacent to YA than adult literature; if you prefer more creative, complicated, and/or signature writing styles, this book is not for you. if you are a big fan of mae martin and would appreciate an overview of their journey on the identity spectrum (going so far as to even rejecting it, in some capacities) in one place, then this may be convenient — but even then, at this point, it's somewhat outdated. imo a well-intention skip.

phil wang and tom allen are two more i think don't convince me with their writing, but i'm still making my ways through a couple of books and could probably talk more about this later!

i have never made this kind of non-fiction bio a priority on my long reading list, so i still have a lot of exploring and catching up to do, but i'm finding that i do prefer the books that explore the events of comedian's past as well as those that walk the reader through experiences in the comedy & tv industries. there are a lot of books about mental health and identity, which may be more of what many of you are looking for (sara pascoe, fern brady, jon richardson, and more).

okaY PHEW SORRY i always type too much 😒

first, as for david mitchell's new book, you can order it signed from waterstones as they ship to the usa — and it's currently half off!!!!! if you want to buy it unsigned from a usa retailer amazon is cheapest and target & bookshop are the cheapest non-amazon options :) an audiobook is coming out as well, so i do believe i will be able to add that to googledrive before too long, but no guarantees on a good time frame!

you can go here to download any of the ebooks & audiobooks i have on my googledrive!

[awakefor48hours]

Aren't you a fan of Belos yourself? Or is liking him/ enjoying his character different from being a fan? Do you not like how others like him?

You know anon, you bring up a good question and because this is something I actually think about a lot, I’m gonna make this a proper post.

The quick answer to this is no. I’m not a fan of Belos like other people. I don’t call him a cringy old gay he/they man, I call him a fascist colonizer and that makes (certain) Belos fans mad for some reason.

Now onto the longer explanation.

As of late (if I had to guess, I’d say the past 6ish years), I feel like there’s been a HUGE change in how fandoms interact with characters who are just bad. I couldn’t put my finger on it until recently when I started stalking the My Hero fandom (yep, bringing My Hero into this but bare with me).

I’m not as involved in the My Hero fandom anymore, I’m so behind on the show and haven’t been in the fandom in years so I don’t know if things have changed but back when I used to live in the My Hero fandom, there were so many Bakugou fans would say that the real reason why he was angry all the time is that he actually had an anxiety disorder and lived in an abusive household. This caused him to be mean to people, especially mean Deku.

That is not true in the slightest.

Bakugou is just a teenage boy with the powers of destruction at his fingertips, that’s it. I’d say that if given the ability to make explosions like Bakugou, a solid 70% of my old high school classmates would be just as bad, if not worse, than Bakugou because teenage boy are awful.

He doesn’t have an abusive household, his mom isn’t toxic, once again, Bakugou is just a teenage boy and teenage boys are just the worst. (No offense to any teenage boys reading this. It’s not you it’s the fact that you're very hormonal and live in a society that actively encourages boys and men to be violent).

Now, why am I bringing up a completely different character from a completely different show into this? It’s because I feel what’s happening in fandoms is that people don’t want to accept and/or admit that they like morally bad characters. The need to find a way to weave a victim complex into a character’s narrative as a way to find the deeper meaning to their shitty behavior is getting to be pretty popular and I don’t like it.

I’ve seen people defend Belos because “he’s actually just battling internalized homophobia” and I hate this because not only does The Owl House demonize this exact type of behavior (and it’s demonized in the scene that Belos is killed) but it’s not an actual excuse to be a bad person. It just feels like the people who say“I can’t be homophobic, I’m a lesbian” wearing a wig. Additionally, Belos being anything but a cishet, white man defeats the purpose of his character. He’s the Christopher Columbus of the show.

If you like bad characters, just say it. Stop hiding a behind the excuse that they’re actually good but we don’t get to see it because they’re traumatized or battling some internalized homophobia, especially when it’s not even canon. It reflects poorly on your understanding of how the characters are written and how mental health works.

[yellowocaballero]

I love how your Bruce is traditional but it is also like a mix of different types of traditional. Like he comes across as both "Rich white old money type" traditional AND "member of a marginalized minority group who take great pride in their identity to cope with years of ostracization and going "the world wanted me dead for my culture and religion so i might as well die loud and proud instead of conforming to their unachievable ideals" " traditional

Thank you for this ask, I really love it! I have a shitton to say on this topic, including a lot of worldbuilding decisions on Gotham cultures, immigrant spaces, segregation, how it ended up like 1920s-1930s NYC/Chicago mixed with my own city, Jason "Foil" Todd's Inferiority Complex, but that would make this depressingly long. Long time readers would know that I have, like, really complex and discrete religion headcanons for everybody I write. It's important.

Any decent Batman Story (TM) is about Gotham. It has to be a huge presence. It's like writing Dick Tracy without Chicago, or Cheers without Boston. When he's written well, Batman is a reflection of Gotham, and they metaphorically represent each other.

Most Batman writers get this, so there's always a lot of historical worldbuilding and everything. But I'm a community health person, and I grew up in the inner area of my own very large city, and creating a Gotham that feels real and rich is more complicated than the Court of Owls stuff. For me, cities are the intersection of culture, community, history, oppression/SES/war etc, and the modern day to day lives of people. When I want to make a rich city that was relevant and important to the story, I wanted to focus on immigrants and cultural minorities. You know - the people who create the cities lol. I decided on a history that involved the idea that Jewish families were the oldest in Gotham, and that they were one of the people to help create it and influence its culture.

I read a Daniel Handler quote just now that said "there is something naturally Jewish about unending misery". What is more Batman, Bruce, and Gotham than that, lol. The Jewish diaspora experience - the traditional history just as you outlined it in your ask - is baked into Gotham, it's the foundation. Gotham is a city of unending misery, but it's a city that stands tall. It takes a thousand hits and always gets back up again. People within it experience unending poverty and suffering, but they stand together. Just fucking refuse to die, as a whole. What's more Jewish than that! What is more Batman than that! Gotham should always be allegorical for Batman and Bruce, and through Gotham existing in that traditional Jewish experience, I think that's where you got the impression of Bruce as very traditional too.

Tim and the Drakes are the modern reflection of this. I was extremely explicit that Tim is alone in the world because of the Holocaust. I talk a lot in the story about how war and violence destroy children's lives, and that stretches back to the 1940s. About how war and violence creates violent children, which is what Tim became. His acting out was from the trauma of seeing his family slaughtered in front of him, and like a lot of people he used his religion to justify it.

There's a reason why the very first moment when Tim and Bruce actually connect as a family is when they find kinship and understanding through their shared backgrounds and values. They both saw their families slaughtered, they're both alone in the world - but they found each other, and they'll keep living.

OK BELIEVE IT OR NOT THAT'S THE SHORT VERSION. Seriously, though, I'm not. Uh. Actually fucking Jewish. This is like the fourth time I've talked out of my ass about this. I'm actually really interested in reading about the actual Jewish themes in Batman, because from what little I know they HAVE to be there. Any smart people out there who know about it, or who can link something written about it?

[sketchedboba]

I get some people raise an eyebrow on how you write Bowser in this au but can I just say hes gotta be one of my favorite Bowsers out there!! ❤

Like no shade to other Bowsers but he's such an interesting and complex character to me I want to learn more about him in this au!

Like it's strange & interesting to me how he can neglect to raise his own imperfect creations yet be willing to take in other imperfect & abandoned koopalings, It makes me wonder about whether it was him being naive to parenthood in his younger years as well as seeing his own imperfections in them.

I actually like him doing poorly at being a parent the first time around but doing great with most of the next set of kids since these things do happen in life and it makes me want to know more about his relationships with not only his kids but their relationships with each other and how it effects everyone, like I'm curious about Bowser's mindset and what he regrets in his life and if he ever considers trying to mend broken family relationships with his older kids, I'm also very curious about how Luigi handles this info and if he calls him out on some things later on when he kinda has the right to do so as a queen and step parent

Im a huge fan but also super shy so sorry for this being anon but your story leaves me with questions and cravings for more it's so good and not just black & white keep up the great work!❤

After reading all of this, thank you 💚

I don't dislike other Bowser interpretations (heck I envy how simple or even more complex others make his character). However thank you!

I've also shared a few times that just because I've written a morally grey or black character, doesn't mean they're terrible overall or stay that way. It gets frustrating having to explain this over and over again especially when the version in my au gets compared to someone's personal version of him or another au. I have nothing against either.

Anygays, what a rant- moving on 😭

I'll reveal more on the Koopa Kids in the next post and I'm excited to share more of their personalities. 🎉 Surprise 🎉 they were the ones the new animatic is going to be about. It'll flesh out their lives a bit more.

As for Luigi's response, there's a comic planned for the confrontation so I won't spoil much outside of that. Just know it gets pretty messy.

Also for anyone doing the math, yes, Bowser wanted an heir at the age of 16, he was royalty AND the only other large koopa species. Kamek is a nice father figure, but he wanted company he could tend to. He was also naive in thinking about how fatherhood worked and Kamek spoiled him, so no wasn't really an answer he would take.

I genuinely found canon Bowser's treatment of different types of the younger koopalings over the years interesting. He praises Junior a lot and most of the others are an after thought (just like how Nintendo treats them...)

I know 10 is a lot of children for him (I've been told this before), but he's 34 almost 35 in my au. He has most definitely will and has fucked up whether it be with his children or his relationships with others.

It's good to know that there are people invested in the au though and don't worry about being anon 😌 I appreciate the support n luv ♥️

Here are these two goofs eating spaghetti. 🧡

[max1461]

Let me try this post again. I think there's something to it, but I don't think I communicated it very well. I'm going to come at this from a more personal angle, and I'm also going to be a bit more careful in my wording. There are also, I think, several different ideas being gestured at in that post, and I'm only going to cover one of them here. The others will get their own posts eventually.

Ok.

I am deeply, deeply in love with the world we live in. I think it is extraordinary beautifully and fascinating. I am continually astounded by the intricacies and strange little details of nature, of human society, of history, and so on. I consider learning about the world to be one of my primary reasons for living. Existing on earth, having nature around to look at and people around to talk to and things to discover is like being in a garden of delights. I can look at a tree! I can learn a language! Moreover, I can read about a tree and then look at that tree, and can see for myself all the things that were in the book, connect the abstract description of some biological fact with my real, direct observation of the physical world around me. The world is a cornucopia of puzzles and mysteries. It is, in a broad structural sense, like my own personal heaven. I cannot overstate the degree to which I love the universe that I am living in.

I think I am, perhaps, an outlier in this regard. Maybe most people don't think this way, at least not as generally as I do. But certainly a lot of people I've met here seem to feel this way. And I think many people, perhaps most, feel this way about some corner of the world even if they don't feel it about the world in general. If you love literature or video games, maybe you feel deeply in love with the works that people have made. If you're passionate about, I don't know, soccer, maybe you're similarly enthralled by the feeling of the game, the experience of practicing and improving, etc. In general, if you like anything... you like that thing! I mean that's a tautology, but like, I hope it conveys what I'm trying to convey.

And I think this experience of passion, this experience of loving the world or some part of the world, is for many people an inherent aspect of a life worth living. Not for everyone, I'm sure—there are people who would be contented without it, and I support those people just as much. But there are likewise people, a lot of people, who would say "without soccer, what's the point? Without trees, what's the point? Without languages to learn, what's the point? If I can't dance, it's not my revolution."

At the same time, it is evident that this world that I'm so in love with is, in many ways, deeply unjust. There is suffering, poverty, disease, loss, grief, and pain. Many of these problems are tractable, and don't interfere with the things that I (or most anyone, I think) loves about the world. Fighting disease and poverty, for instance. These are two great imperatives, and for the most part I think their cost is purely one of human time and energy. We can fix these things if we try hard, if we put in the resources, and so on. These are not efforts that come at the cost of the world I love.

Some forms of injustice are not so obviously orthogonal to human passion. The type case here, I think, is wild animal suffering. There is a huge amount of suffering in nature, of pain and fear and death. Billions upon billions of organisms in pain. And right now, as awful as it may sound, I feel almost thankful that any proposed solutions to this problem remain in the realm of the fantastical. Because, you know, I love nature! Part of the reason I wake up every day is to experience the nature around me! And solving the problem of animal suffering—freeing all those billions of organisms from their constant struggle—would involve irreparably changing nature into something else, something without the organic complexity that makes it what it is.

And, you know, I want to put aside all arguments about the advisability of trying to meddle with ecosystems and all that. I agree, wholeheartedly, that humans trying to jump in and solve the problem of wild animal suffering would almost certainly be immensely stupid. That's not the point! The point is, suppose that we could. With no catastrophic consequences, no great collapse. And ignore any trolley problems, ignore any ethical conundra that might arise, like "how do we weight animal freedom against animal pain?" or "how do we acquire consent to alter aspects of the biosphere from stakeholders who can't communicate?" or whatever. Pretend it all magically works out. Should we do it? I don't know, but I think the answer might be "probably".

But then nature is gone! The intricate complexity of ecosystems is gone! Remember, that complexity relies on cycles of predation, on natural selection! Pain and suffering are built into it! But ending that pain and suffering requires something terrible in its own way. I think there are people who would wake up in that new world, that world where nature per se no longer exists, and say "what am I waking up for anymore? What is the point now? The world I loved is gone."

This description so far also relies on positing, falsely, a separation between humans and nature, or perhaps between passion-feelers and nature. Remember, many of those wild animals are not so different from us. Don't you think a horse feels something similar to passion when it sees a wide sprawling grassland to run across? If you aren't sure that it does, don't you think it at least might? Don't you think lions are passionate about the hunt? I think they might be. Some people are. And lions aren't that far away from us, biologically. But zebras suffer because of the lions' hunt!

So it's not just the fare of privileged outside observers to say "oh no, you ended mass suffering but also took away my pretty garden!". It's not just the slaveholder lamenting the end of slavery. It's that the world itself is an intricate mixture of passions and pains, and each passion is predicated on a pain! The lion wants to keep hunting, the zebra wants to keep grazing, the grass—if it wants, which I don't know that it doesn't—wants to keep photosynthesizing.

We all live in a world where the basic things that make us happy are predicated on the current structure of the world, which involves a great amount of suffering. Maybe some of us would be happy to, as it were, live in a zoo and sustain ourselves on nutrient mush, and would take this as the necessary price for the end of suffering. But I think most of us would find that existence intolerable. Our ability to enjoy life is dependent on being part of this matrix, part of this complex web, and pain is another, inextricable part of it.

Or, at least, that's the fear. I don't know. Maybe there is a way to create a world were suffering is minimal but you and me and lions and zebras all still get to live something approaching "the good life". We all still get to have a worthwhile existence, an existence we feel satisfied by. I'm not sure if this is possible when the whole of the biosphere is taken into account (which is why I chose it as an example), but I think it very well might be possible with regard to human society. And I think we should work tirelessly to find it, because if it is possible then achieving it is an utter imperative. But I fear that it isn't, and that makes me sad, and concerned. But it's still worth trying.

Ok, maybe that wasn't actually any better phrased than the last time. I don't know. I seem incapable of writing about this topic in a disinterested manner, at least at present. But hopefully that's at least a little better, and answers some of the questions people had last time.

[spaceorphan18]

I agree with you about Finchel; they make more sense as a high school romance, that was really the time when they could have helped (and did help) each other to grow. After high school though, they don't really work as a couple. What they want from life, how they want to live their lives, isn't compatible. That might be controversial to say but in my opinion even RM's reported original plan for how the series was going to end supports that; they would be really back together (and last) only after Rachel had achieved most of her career-related dreams and Finn had gotten over his insecurities. I understand why lots of people like the "opposites attract" type of relationship, but most of the time that doesn't work too well long-term. But all of that said, I don't dislike them. I like early Finchel, and I don't mind them in season 2-3. I just think their relationship was more suited to be a high school romance, like you said, and I like them better as "exes who are always going to be thankful for the relationship they had because it was beautiful and meaningful while it lasted but they understand why they had to go their own ways".

And I think you have written a very quick interaction between Jesse and Blaine in the The Sims fic.... Or maybe it was in another story, I don't remember it now. I would check but AO3 is currently down! But that's why I had mentioned it.

Nonny. First of all. I went back and read The Addiction - and it still cracks me up. And it makes me want to play the Sims again.... It doesn't really have Jesse/Blaine interaction, though. I'll have to make sure a future fic has some of that fun dynamic!

Anyway... I really agree with what you've said about Finchel!

Yeah, I actually have a lot of thoughts about Finchel! And, it's kind of complex, as it's not coming from a place of like or dislike, just evaluation.

I think Finn and Rachel were actually very sweet in Season 1 and really didn't mind them in Season 2. I think they both did get something positive out of the relationship. Rachel got validation that she was worth loving from someone outside her sphere, while Finn gained knowledge that he could be more than the labels that were bestowed onto him. They did help each other grow -- and grow up into the people they'd one day become.

That's the thing about relationships that I think sometimes is missed in media. And this goes to friendships and other kinds of relationships beyond romantic ones -- that people come into our lives and sometimes those people only stay for a short time, but their impact can effect us for the rest of our lives. And even if it is a short time, it doesn't mean it wasn't meaningful or worth going through.

By Season 3, I think it's apparent that Finn and Rachel's story kind of ran its course. (Even if the writers/RM did plan to bring them back together one day...) Rachel was always meant to go out and live in a big city and be on Broadway. And she needed to have someone who could not only keep up with her, but not feel threated by her level of success. Her star was going to always shine bright, and I just don't feel like Finn was ever fully going to feel comfortable living in the shadow of that.

Meanwhile, Finn's story is one that (like Will - whom he's modeled after) it's okay to come home and stay tome. I actually really liked the idea that Finn would have flourished in a small town, and realizing that it has worth and that he can do good things. Something Glee struggled with -- was the idea that you can be more than just a huge Broadway star. You can teach in a small town and have it be fulfilling and meaningful. Rachel would have never been happy on such a smaller stage. But it would have suited Finn wonderfully.

So - at the end of the day (Jesse aside) I just think their stories were going in two different directions. But the impact they had on each other was always meaningful. And I actually like that aspect of Finchel.

[chaotic-tired-cat]

Hey I was wondering If you plan on updating your legacy fic on Ao3, It was really good I've read it multiple times. Although it took me awhile but on like my 6th or seventh re-read I just realized the names of the chapter titles make a really good poem though I'm unsure if that's intentional or not.

Almost everything midoyria does I'd a giant metaphor with him being a gardener planting seeds in the present for the sake of the future. No matter how much he refused to directly fight his brother it seems like he's been planning this kind of thing for hundreds of years. I wouldn't be surprised if One for All was behind the creation of UA or everything going on in its current society.

-Sorry for the long paragraph your story is wild and completely insane, I really want to read about everyone's expression of shock when he come out because otherwise I'm pretty sure they'll never find out otherwise who he is as AFO brother.

Heyo, I am thriving abt your ask! It gave me fuel to go back and edit a bit of Legacy's next chapter. Also, I'm downright flattered that you've read Legacy so many times!! Considering it a huge compliment. Losing my mind. I am very hopeful for reveals to live up to expectations. And yep! The poem by Clare Harner is 100% on purpose. I'm including corresponding imagery in each chapter/title as a scavenger hunt of themes and more literal moments, though some (like Ripened Grain -> Harvest/Seasons/time passing -> Ochako eating rose petals & students moving towards self-sufficiency) are pretty abstract.

Gardening!! Learning to think of life and potential happiness beyond the next immediate harvest is a big theme and you're absolutely correct on that. Cannot confirm or deny suspicions on what specifically is in the works for Izuku, but please know I am delighted with what you said. To tide you over, I added a tiny & mildly unedited snippet under the readmore that your ask me very impatient to share.

Legacy absolutely will be updated and finished. I'm just dealing with a limitation irl where prolonged typing is difficult sometimes. (Feel free to poke me whenever for a snippet, though! I know the agony of waiting ages for a fic to update and wouldn't wish it on anyone.)

Legacy spoilers beyond this point:

“Why gardening?” Tsukauchi asks finally, wrapping chilled hands around his coffee cup. “From what I'm understanding, you’ve been around long enough to get practiced at pretty much anything. Why… plants?”

He doesn't mean it in a rude way, and Midoriya smiles a bit at the blunt curiosity Tsukauchi cannot help.

“Because they’re like us,” he says. 

Tsukauchi gives him a bewildered look. “Plants?”

“They can’t be completed,” Midoriya says firmly. It sounds like a lesson that was hard learned. “I can make my garden better. I can plant seeds and weed it, I can water it and fret over every last insect that enters it, but it will never be finished. There will never be a point where I’m done and can abandon it. Somehow, people do it anyway. They keep trying.”

Tsukauchi frowns. “So this whole time, it’s been a metaphor for.. what? Mental health?”

“Finding happiness,” Midoriya says. “Or maybe it’s just a hobby paired with an old man’s ramblings.”

His statement rings true for both. Midoriya brushes dirt off his hands and uses his wrist to push green hair back. Sometimes Tsukauchi wonders if Midoriya’s original quirk was earth or plant related, and if All for One swapped it with an immortality one before anyone knew any better. It’s impossible to tell.

Tsukauchi washes the thought back with bitter coffee and winces when it burns his tongue. “That’s a complex game to play.”

“Not a game,” Midoriya tells him. He sets aside his tools and stands up. Here in the garden, Midoriya seems more at home than he could ever be on a battlefield. 

Nezdu sees it too.

He asked Tsukauchi to meet with him and Nighteye tomorrow about possibly placing Midoriya in a modified track for heroics. Nothing will happen without the groundskeeper indicating he’s like a life in the very industry that’s protecting him, but it’s a good plan. If he gets a heroics license, Midoriya will have a job waiting for him at UA once the investigation is over.

Even Tsuakuchi can see the heroic spirit Midoriya carries.

Toshinori says he's a good teacher, too.

[Yall, it's so hard not to add the following three paragraphs to this snippet, but they are low-key massive spoilers. apostriavin, those lines are now dedicated to you.]

[anneapocalypse]

rvb fandom for the choose violence ask game! 1, 12, 17, and 24.

🔥 choose violence ask game 🔥

Obligatory disclaimer that I'm a few years out of the loop on RvB fandom at this point, so take anything I say about "the fandom" with that in mind, and a huge grain of salt.

1. the character everyone gets wrong

I freely admit that I've always been brutally picky about depictions of Carolina, and I think I've griped about most facets of that in one meta post or another over the years! There was the Freelancer-era hate for her of course, writing her off as caring about winning above all else and ignoring her demonstrated concern for her team members (something even later seasons seemed to forget happened), the awful bitch who broke precious perfect York's heart, etc etc but there was also a sort of overcompensation that happened later, where people liked Carolina and wanted to portray her sympathetically but seemed to struggle to reconcile that with the fact that she is, in fact, prickly and difficult a lot of the time! So you'd get these sort of smoothed-over versions of Freelancer and present-day season 10 Carolina that were certainly well-intentioned, but still, for me, kind of off-base in terms of who the character actually is.

12. the unpopular character that you actually like and why more people should like them

Since I just talked about Carolina, and since I think she is in fact fairly well-liked these days as female RvB characters go, I will say instead that Kimball is a wonderful, complex character who deserves so much love always and forever. I don't think Kimball is unpopular in the sense of being hated, but more in the sense of having fallen out of relevance in recent canon and becoming, along with the entirety of the Chorus arc, tragically overlooked.

My hottest take about Kimball, I guess, is that for a lot of season 13's conflicts, she is objectively right and Doyle is wrong. The arc she has to go on in season 13 isn't realizing that Doyle is right about combat strategy (if you listen to what he's actually suggesting, his ideas are almost universally terrible) but recognizing that he, as an individual person, is not responsible for what happened to Chorus or to her people, that most of the surviving Feds are inheritors of the conflict rather than instigators of it, that the people they were originally rebelling against are all dead, and that working together to fight back against Charon is Chorus's only hope for survival. Flattening that into "both sides are wrong" is kind of insulting to Kimball and I think misrepresents the nature of the conflict. Also, I think her season 12 characterization is so important and everything she does in 13 needs to be read in light of that. Her greatest strength is the faith she has in people.

17. there should be more of this type of fic/art

More love for Chorus in general!

24. topic that brings up the most rancid discourse

Mental illness headcanons as a cover for "my fave is the best/woobiest/poorest little meow meow and your fave sucks and is an abuser/war criminal" slapfights. (Please note I am not saying mental illness headcanons are bad in and of themselves, just that I've seen them tangled up in so much terrible discourse over the years.) If there's one thing I can confidently say about RvB, it's that everyone's a war criminal and they all have PTSD and are wet and sad. Let's move on with our lives.

[elenichr]

Year of Lists

July Books

She a long one

I also left this so late, I don't remember much

The Trespasser by Tana French - don't remember anything about this, just that I enjoyed speeding through it. I think Tana French's work has that quality of quiet enjoyment to it. A small break from reality - so a 3*? (that's my goodreads rating anw)

Μαμά by Μαργαρίτα Καραπάνου *4.7/5 - this, I do remember. It's a quick read, much of Karapanou is; none of it is light and this one is darker and more complex than most. It's a melee of the writer's relationship with/memory of her mother. Vignettes, impressions, memories, snippets of a life lived, felt or imagined. Karapanou was a remarkable artist, and boy, could she weave a sentence.

I'm Not Here to Give a Speech by Gabriel García Márquez *4.5/5 - delightful; just a neat little collection of speeches. Isn't it funny how gifted some people are at things they don't really enjoy doing?

American Born Chinese by Gene Luen Yang *5/5 - nothing to see here. Love all around. <3 <3

Tokyo Express by Seichō Matsumoto *3.5/5 - this was yummy. If you find oldish, matter-of-fact writing, noir-type police procedurals with limited but astute action delicious, this is for you.

Girl Goddess Queen by Bea Fitzgerald *4/5 - okay. Hear me out.

*sidenote* This is Lore Olympus in novel form. So much so that I wondered if Bea Fitzgerald wasn't a pen name for Rachel Smythe and vice versa.

--

Was it repetitive, occasionally annoyingly so? Yes. Did I think it could have benefitted from better editing? Yes. Did I obsess over it and think about the characters and the slow-burn romance of it all for at least a week? Yes. Did I buy Bea Fitzgerald's new novel a day into publication and can't wait to read it but I'm travelling a lot and didn't want to carry it cause it's huge? Yes. Did it make me hyperfixate on finding the epic romance of the decade - the century even, the book that makes your knees tremble, to no avail? Yes.

I loved this. I loved this so so much, flaws and all.

*sidenote, again* Madeline Miller rewriting Persephone too - would love to read that version

The Familiar by Leigh Bardugo - like a 3*. It's not something that sticks but it's readable and you do care when you're reading it. One thing I can say for certain, I was sure I wanted to read more Leigh Bardugo, and I have, since reading this, spent a lot of time on deciding what that'll be. (Six of Crows, probably this Autumn, early Winter)

Little Rot by Akwaeke Emezi *3.7/5 - It's a good narrative from a very talented writer/artist, whose work I've admired from the get-go and will continue to consume either til the end, or til the potentially inevitable decline. The .7 purely on talent.

These Violent Delights by Chloe Gong - deets on this with the sequel which I read in August - and it's a lot