#lit meta

[degenderates]

And so what if the author has a sexual fetish for the torment nexus? One can have a sexual fetish for the torment nexus while also warning against the creation of the torment nexus. We are dichotomous beings, humans

[kvitka97]

It seems much more common now that this is happening.

Is it a failure of the education system? How did we lose our curiosity and our sense of adventure. Leaning in to what we already know and experience is so tragically boring.

i dont know how else to put this but to approach books (or any media, really) solely for the sake of relatability is genuinely incredibly heartbreaking……to have such little (or such unwilling) imaginative scope that you cannot stretch yourself, even marginally, in a different direction to what you’ve known or are used to knowing when the very POINT of stories is to transport you somewhere else, into someone else, so you can do just that……..when fran lebowiz said a book “is supposed to be a door!” and george saunders said good prose “is like empathy training wheels” they were right!!! they were so so so SO absolutely entirely right!!!!!

[yannisdesk]

On Arcane & Antivillains

One thing I really enjoy about Arcane is how it handles antivillains.

For one, most of the characters (main ones) would actually fall into the category of antivillain at one point, or in the case of our two protagonists, become one. Arcane is arguably ripe with them.

An antivillain is essentially the opposite of an antihero. Simplified, antiheros do good things out of selfish or questionable motives, antivillains do things that are objectively bad or evil, but for noble reasons or for a greater cause. Another term for them is "sympathetic villain" however that term is too vague (there are villains out there who are sympathetic, but are none the less traditionally evil and therefore do not qualify as antivillains), and "antivillain" is a much better term mirror to "antihero." A common thread I've noticed among antivillain characters is some level of a Machiavellian approach to achieving their goals - the ends justify the means type of philosophy is something you'll always find characters that fit this category. At the very least, they dabble with it. In their eyes their actions are always justified because they're fighting for a good cause.

To put things into perspective, I'll use two examples. Harley Quinn shifts around, but she is frequently an antihero, take her depiction in both Suicide Squad movies. She does take down bad guys, however she's not doing so out of a sense of altruism, but to get a reduced prison sentence. Very cut-and-dry example of antiheroism.

On the flip side you have Magneto. Now from what I've seen (I've dabbled in the comics, but haven't dived in all the way) in the comics he gets very dark with the antihuman action. But in the Xmen movies, he definitely does some down right villainous stuff, but his intention remains the same - he wants mutants to live in a world free of bigotry and he's willing to do anything necessary to achieve that, including committing atrocities.

Now if this sounds very confusing to you and you swear you've heard these terms interchangeably or that you can think of several characters that are labeled as type A when they should be type B or vice versa, that's pretty normal. These aren't archetypical heroes and villains we're talking about, so it can be hard to categorize them, and honestly most characters in general will go back and forth or shift at one point or another, so all you need to know is that those definitions are the ones we're working with in this post.

Here are the characters from Arcane that I think suit this label, and others that I think will.

Disclaimer: this is not me hating on the characters. I love all of these characters for this layer to their character. This is not a "oh, look, this character is bad actually," post. If anything, consider it a celebration of their gray morality and how well its explored in the show.

Silco

Duh. Silco is objectively pretty evil. Setting up a drug empire that destroys your own people, getting in-cahoots with corrupt cops, killing kids, and aiding in destroying a young girl's mental health is multiple levels of foul. However, for him, all of this was part of an elaborate plan to liberate Zaun, which is being aggressively oppressed by Piltover. They were necessary sacrifices made to the cause, and worth it because it will bring forth better days for him and his people. Now obviously, a lot of his actions definitely have to do with his own ego, however the only time Zaun isn't prioritized is when it comes to Jinx, who is like a daughter to him, and even that realization comes to smack in the face late in his arc.

Sevika

I'd argue she's even more noble than most since she truly is rooted in the cause for Zaun. Not only is she willing to do some pretty bad things for the "greater-good", she's even willing to betray people who she views as unfit or incompetent. And what's even more telling is that she doesn't do this for power (which is arguably a part of Silco's prerogative). Sure, she's his #2, but he doesn't exactly show any favoritism. And Sevika seemingly isn't even trying to become the new leader of Zaun after Silco's death from the season 2 clips, but will support Jinx, despite the fact that she probably could dethrone her. She's no true blue hero, but she's not a megalomaniac either.

The Entire Council of Piltover (Minus Mel & Jayce)

As obnoxious as they are, none of them are mustache-twirling villains. As we see with characters like Sheriff Grayson (not a council member, but they share the same sentiment), they legitimately think they're protecting the city with their neglectful leadership and oppression of Zaunites. Yes, this includes Heimerdinger, who seemingly only started caring about Zaun once he was booted out of the council, so that places him firmly in antihero territory in my opinion.

Why did I exclude Mel and Jayce? Their plots are actually upward in terms of morality, especially Jayce who by the end is closer to being a traditional hero by prioritizing peace and progress over the status quo or war, and actively makes the first move of trying to right Piltover's wrongs. Mel's arc has also moved this direction as well, as she went from arguing that Jayce and Viktor should build Hextech weapons in case of war with the Zaunites, to fully embracing peace. You could argue that Mel wanting the weapons means she was at some point an antivillain, and I might agree, but as it stands, she's firmly in the clear.

So, why are the rest of the council still considered antivillains? Honestly, we just don't know much about their motivations to say. They ultimately did a good deed in voting for peace, but you know, one good deed doesn't wash-out the bad and vice versa. They're not even on thin ice for me, they're still fighting for the surface.

Marcus

Questioning your actions does not mean you can't be an antivillain, and Marcus is a good example of that. He's is kind of like Caitlyn if she were way less compassionate and very incompetent. Marcus does not think his actions are evil, according to show runners he only places Vi in Stillwater to protect her from Silco; he gets involved with Silco because he wants justice for the building explosion and it goes out of hand. That said, he also threw a child into a dangerous prison with no charges and with the intention of keeping her there for life, and worked with a kingpin who was actively antagonizing his own people while reaping benefits from an abusive system. So yeah, Marcus falls more into being an antivillain than full-blown villain, he's still firmly an antagonist though.

Ambessa

I know it's very popular in the fandom to call Ambessa a traditional bad-guy type of villain, but she is actually very nuanced. For one - she does not see her actions as evil, nor are her motivations behind doing them rooted in it. Ambessa, as she states in Mel's flashback, was raised in the Noxian way. Her grandfather literally made her search the dead bodies of the people they massacred when she was a youth, and she was indoctrinated to believe that this was in the best interest of her family and the Noxian people. By showing strength and ruthlessness, she's telling the rest of the world: "Stay away from House Medarda and Noxus." Hence, why Kino's death wrecks her, because she values herself over how effective she is at warding people off from messing with her family. Her main reason for getting involved with the war between Piltover and Zaun will 100% be because Mel's life was nearly lost due to Jinx's bomb, and this is coming straight off of her son's death mind you. So, while Ambessa may definitely be one of the most ruthless people on this list, she is not at Palpatine levels of evil yet, not by a long shot.

Jinx

You guys saw this coming, right? This barely needs an explanation. Jinx grew up in the Lanes, was a victim of Piltover's oppression multiple times throughout her youth, was willing to fight for their freedom as seen in episode 2, and in the end, that desire, along with her being adopted by Silco, manifested in her doing multiple acts of violence, including terrorism against Piltover, which frequently hurt people who weren't guilty of anything. (No, blowing up the building in episode 3 doesn't count as one of her evil deeds because it was an accident.) We understand completely why Jinx does what she does, even though it hurts to see her slip farther and farther into this mindset.

Vi

Way more subtle (for now) but I'd argue she's there come episodes 8 and 9. Hell, you could argue that her arc is about her sense of morality breaking down due to realizing how impossible the situation between Zaun and Piltover is, and embracing an "ends justifies the means" type mindset that Vander tried to sway her against back in episode 2. Wanting to stop a kingpin from using this new dangerous drug to destroy your city and sister? A noble cause, indeed. Not really caring that (or being passive over the fact that) children die in process because of their approximation to said bad guy? Yikes. [EDIT: Since we're on this topic: here's a link to where I explored this aspect of her character. I did this a while ago, but I thought it best to include it here too for added context). Now, I know what some of you are going to say - how is this any different from, say, Steve Rogers telling Wanda Maximoff that sometimes there's collateral damage when doing hero work? The difference is that Steve didn't argue that those people had it coming because they're associated with the bad guys/or in their way, which Vi does. That's some dangerous conviction right there, and we'll probably see that elaborated on in season 2 given that she's becoming an Enforcer which is a position that lends itself to abuse of power (and if it goes anyway like things do with her game counterpart, she will engage in police brutality and not see an issue with it, but given that Arcane's Vi is way more well, nuanced, than her game counterpart I don't think it will go on for long). While we're on the topic of Vi, according to her prison records, she had a notorious reputation while doing time to the point that I find it funny Silco didn't put 2-and-2 together that the girl with short pink hair beating the shit out of and attempting to murder all of his goons that went to Stillwater was possibly the same girl that wiped the floor with those same goons the night Vander died.

Potential Antivillains of Season 2:

These are characters that I predict will become antivillains at some point during season 2 based off of where their season 1 arc left and clues from season 2 teasers and clips. This is not me saying for sure this will happen, only a prediction. But if it does come true, I will gladly collect $5 per accurate plot point.

Viktor

Two words: glorious evolution.

We all love Viktor. We all love good-guy Viktor, and we will also more than likely love not-so-good-guy Viktor due to how complex that arc will be. If it will go anything like his game-lore (which I suspect it will) his noble intentions will never leave him, just simply evolve to include some less-than-heroic actions and justifications. He still wants to improve the undercity, and well, humanity overall, with hextech, motivated by the injustices he's been put through his own life and his illness, but he will go about it in some very unorthodox ways, and his arc in Arcane is about him confronting if he wants to "evolve" his morality for the sake of his ultimate goal, which is progress. Viktor would definitely agree with the sentiment expressed by Gloria Steinem (character depiction, not a real quote) in Mrs. America - "Revolutions are messy, people get left behind."

Caitlyn

I'm pretty sure she actually will become apart of the antivillain roster in season 2, but noting is for certain. Caitlyn is perhaps the saddest version of this there is, because we see where she starts out. She doesn't want to be like everyone else in her circle, she tries to break free and be better. She wants to do good by both Piltover and Zaun. She has hope, gentleness, and doesn't place herself above even those who occupy the lowest levels of Zaun. She puts herself, her status, and her life on the line to discover the truth, and comes out her time with Vi steadfast in wanting to help heal Zaun. She can be a little naive and ignorant, but she never does so with malicious or ill intent. She is the kindest person in Arcane.

But, given that her mother was killed in a terrorist attack set off by the new Head Zaunite in Charge, things will change. As we see, Caitlyn becomes a sheriff on the Enforcer squad, and now her goal is no longer to sow peace between Zaun and Piltover, it's to avenge her mother by assassinating Jinx. Of course, this will be due in part that Caitlyn thinks snuffing Jinx out will solve the problem, which will be ironic and hypocritical because she told Ekko that getting revenge on Silco won't solve anything in Zaun, but now that she's in the same predicament, the tables have turned and now diplomacy is off the table. She still has that hero-complex, as she lives by the lessons of Sheriff Grayson, but now it's with a twist. The idealistic Caitlyn who believed in giving peace a chance through reform is gone, and she now believes that there's little to no cost too great for her to achieve this, even if that (possibly - again season 2 hasn't come out yet, so we shall see) means hurting innocent Zaunites. And what's scary is that Caitlyn has the intelligence, dedication, talent, and efficiency to pull it off. Truthfully, I believe we won't just be getting Sheriff Caitlyn in season 2, but also Dictator Caitlyn.

[literallyjusttoa]

"A Jester can mock, and the King cannot fight

For the gift of free thought is the jester's one right."

A sweet golden prince who lived up in the sky,

Listened to his families' terrible fights,

The ceiling would rumble, the tile would shake,

The throne room was fragile, and soon it would break.

He'd attempt to speak, but it never went right,

His father would rage, and he'd lose every fight,

As decades passed by, it soon became clear,

The King saw his son as a monster to fear.

The Prince quickly followed every command,

Only to be trapped by his father's cruel hand,

Years of destruction with no end in sight,

This war would not end with a large act of might.

And so the Prince stopped fighting fire with fire,

And instead he pulled out his golden stringed lyre,

Since he had no respect, he would leave the King's cage,

And swap out the throne room for a shining stage.

He taunted with wit and he giggled with guile,

And even his sorrow he shared with a smile,

His father's gaze lessened, his temper was tame,

As his once "Golden Prince" treated life like a game.

The centuries passed and the mirth never ceased,

The sun never set on the first son of Greece,

He danced for his siblings and bit down his pain,

Since each peal of laughter meant there'd be less rain.

There's only one role for which there are no rules,

So who is the jester, and who is the fool?

[aficionadoenthusiast]

i sincerely hope that will's casting looks as much like walker as possible so that the 'not his type' jokes finally die and everybody realizes percy isn't his type not because of hair color or any other physical attribute but simply because nico has outgrown that part of his life and has to let go of it in order to move on. like. please recognize it for the literary symbolism it is. it is important to me that y'all realize this.

[malinaa]

idk if it's been talked about before but suzanne collins never misses a BEAT when it came to names, specifically coriolanus snow and dr volumnia gaul. just from their first names alone you can already guess what type of role might play between them (well... if you've read shakespeare's coriolanus that is. i do recommend it btw).

a lot of bits were taken from shakespeare's play for tbosas like the motif with scars / wounds / the body as being a microcosm of the nation, the common people fighting up against the government, coriolanus' hatred of the common people wanting to be "equal" to him, the rebel arc etc etc but i'm soooo so so interested in the fact that dr gaul was named volumnia and coriolanus is coriolanus because in the play, coriolanus' mother's name is volumnia!

volumnia is arguably the only female character in the play that has any depth (i am so sorry virgilia). his mother shapes her son into the warrior he is. she reminds him at every turn that he is nothing more than a weapon to be wielded. in fact, she's the one who gets her son to come back from his "revolt" against rome which ultimately lead to his demise. this parallels tbosas in the same way because dr gaul took coriolanus and molded him into the villain you would see in thg trilogy. she brought him back from d12 and then brought about the end of his humanity (a death, so to speak—at the end of the book he said something similar to this to try to save himself from lucy gray's suspicions but he was right because he did kill a part of himself to be where he is)! coriolanus snow's mother is present but off-page. her ghost haunts him, comforts him, but the 'mother' figure is the ever-present, all-knowing dr gaul.

UGH! like with just their names you could map out where they end up at the end of the story and that's literally insane. like the caliber of writing is literally next to none fr

[rosenotactuallyquartz]

i was looking at the halloween sketch & i noticed something absolutely heartbreaking about garnet and rose

sometimes garnet’s grief is overlooked because she’s always trying to stay stable & strong. just as fusions depend on a stable bond, garnet keeps it together so that she can keep the crystal gems together. she’s very loving & she’s also the type of person who tries to hold it together because she wants to protect steven, because she cares deeply about pearl & amethyst.

that’s why the episode title now we’re only falling apart is important. i’ve written before about how garnet felt like her world had turned upside down after the reveal. her grief was already painful enough, she was already putting on a brave face. after this reveal she could no longer keep it together, literally & figuratively.

but really, you can see the pain she’s experiencing from losing rose long before now we’re only falling apart. in older pictures from when rose was alive, garnet laughs often and has this big, carefree, genuine smile that we see less of after rose’s death. she loves pearl, amethyst, and steven to pieces; they mean everything to her… & so did rose. her grief may be quiet because she tries not to fall apart & she doesn’t want others to notice it, but little details like this reveal her pain.

[degenderates]

tired of seeing the same 5 YA books* in the notes so here are 5 books that actually made me break down in tears and lose sanity:

Pachinko - Min Jin Lee a family saga of korean immigrants to japan. i wish i could say more but i read it years ago and can't remember the specifics, just that it left me a hollow shell for like a month. CWs: a lot of xenophobia and mental health issues, including suicide.

The Song of Achilles - Madeline Miller queer retelling/reading of the Iliad through the relationship of achilles/patroclus. this one's pretty popular online and it deserves to be. CWs: major character death (obviously), war

The Carnivorous Lamb - Augustin Gomez-Arcos an allegory for fascist Spain, and the romantic/sexual relationship between two brothers as the metaphorical resistance to it. also critiques Catholicism. this book is where the infamous tumblr line "whether you come as lover or executioner, I am ready to receive you" comes from. CWs: incest, CSA, child neglect

Strange the Dreamer duology - Laini Taylor ok now i WILL recommend a YA book, but it definitely treads the line of adult fantasy and it's nothing like acotar/shadow & bone/etc. split dual perspective, the first follows a quest format of an orphan who was raised as a monk and the daughter of a god who is trapped in a home full of ghosts. there's a lot of untapped queer-trans readings of this book i think. CWs: non-graphic mass rape of women and other typical god-pantheon disgustingness.

Flowers in the Attic - V.C. Andrews HERE ME OUT....before you go, josiah why are you recommending us two incest books, please remember that i am a normal person (english major) with normal interests (gothic fiction). for those of you who somehow don't know what this is about, a mother locks her four children in their rich grandparents' attic while she tries to get back in her father's good graces--and money. the children come of age in this attic among years of abuse. CWs: incest, rape, child abuse.

*DO read Aristotle and Dante Discover the Secrets of the Universe. the notes are right about that one

what is the best book you’ve ever read in ur entire life i need a book that will completely ruin my life hello please

[now-you-sound-like-a-jedi]

I think that Bo-Katan's attitude towards Satine - particularly her anger at Satine's death despite having been involved with Death Watch (which I have often seen described as hypocrisy) - makes a lot more sense if you think about it in the same terms as Brutus' "not that I loved Caesar less, but that I loved Rome more" line from Julius Caesar (Shakespeare, Julius Caesar, III.II. 22).

By that I mean that Bo-Katan, like Brutus, fully believes that the awful things she's doing are for the benefit of her state and people, and that she can square off the possibility of hurting her sister because she honestly thinks that it would ultimately lead to a better Mandalore. It isn't that she wants to do it but rather that, in her mind, she has to.

"As Caesar loved me, I weep for him [...] but, as he was ambitious, I slew him" (Shakespeare, Julius Caesar, III.II. 24-27). These two things are not contradictory in Brutus' mind; he can mourn Caesar because he loved him despite having been the one to kill him, because one of those things is personal and the other is politics and so they have no bearing on each other, therefore these two sentiments can co-exist. Brutus loved Caesar-the-friend and hated Caesar-the-dictator, and as there was no way for him to separate the two in practice, he did what he believed he had to do.

And that is precisely the kind of thought process that would allow Bo-Katan to be sad and angry about Satine's death despite having contributed to the circumstances that brought about that outcome. And that isn't so much hypocrisy as it is cognitive dissonance, a conflicting sense of duty, and a hell of a lot of compartmentalisation. Because just as Brutus hated dictator-Caesar but loved Caesar himself, Bo-Katan hated the pacifist duchess of Mandalore but still loved her big sister - it was just unfortunate that there was no way to hurt one but not the other.

[lookmomitsmytmblr]

OKAY so I am re-listening to "Death and The Queen" again and I am having Thoughts™.

I can't find any info about when this drama takes place continuity-wise, but my personal placement would be after "Planet of The Ood" (4x3) and before "The Sontaran Stratagem" (4x4) because 4x4-4x6 take place directly following each other with Donna stating at the end of 4x6 that she plans to travel with the Doctor forever. Donna's determination to continue traveling w him is in keeping with the conclusion of Death and The Queen, where she comes to the decision that the Doctor IS her "happily ever after," as it were. Placing the drama after "Fires of Pompeii" and "Planet of The Ood" also makes sense with Donna's desire in the audio drama to have a break from "the extraordinary" of traveling with the Doctor (specifically, horrific death and destruction,) which adds understandable context to her seemingly being so willing to leave the Doctor after searching for him for so long.

 (Don't talk to me about the ending of Forest of The Dead. It's unlikely Donna would have left the Doctor even if she found Lee. Donna's desire to confirm whether Lee was real could be easily contextualized by her wanting to know how much of her experiences inside CAL were a fabrication, and what the supposed "perfect husband" persona would have said about her if it was drawn from her own mind. Also it was written by Moffatt so it shouldn't count anyway.)

ANyway, what I actually wanted to talk about. Notably, considerable emphasis is placed on Donna enjoying her role as Queen and especially caring for her subjects and having power to help people. A greater amount of text is dedicated to her talking about how as Queen she can care for her subjects than her love for Rudolph, even before the reveal that he is human(?) trash. Her attachment to the role of Queen that marrying Rudolph will grant her is established to be largely based upon her passion for helping people rather than luxuries associated with rank, especially in view of the montage of how royal life on Gorotainia is not as glamorous as she hoped but is still enthralled by being Queen. Later in the story, when danger has appeared, her main role in the story is sacrificing and taking the lead to protect her subjects.

Notably, when things start going downhill and Rudolph starts talking to her about the difficult choices that he must make as royalty she comments that Rudolph is “just like HIM” (the Doctor) and that she went with Rudolph to escape these darker aspects of her travels with the Doctor, specifically the hard choices that go with the role the Doctor plays in the universe (while she doesn’t connect these concepts directly, these two statements are placed very close to one another textually.)

Only when her relationship with Rudolph and role as Queen seems like it will involve some of the same dark choices that her travels with Doctor did does Donna decide she doesn’t want to be involved anymore, which is quickly reversed when she finds out she needs to become Queen in order to protect her people. (I love Donna. In case you can’t tell.)

The narrative has established that a large part of Donna’s attachment to her relationship with Rudolph is potential authority to help and guide people, and that her main interest in pursuing a life with Rudolph rather than her travels with the Doctor was her perception that her role as Queen of Gorotainia would not involve the same death and destruction she has seen with the Doctor. Perfectly understandable after experiencing something like Pompeii.

Donna’s compassion and empathy have been essential components of her character since her introduction, with her wanting to protect the Doctor despite being irritated with him and feeling sorrow for the children of a Rancoss that wanted her to be eaten in “The Runaway Bride”, her taking the time to mention Stacy in “Partners In Crime,” and literally everything in “Fires of Pompeii” and “Planet of The Ood’. Donna has always taken the time and the energy to think of others and work to protect them, even this early in her run. In view of how deeply she feels the pain of others, it is understandable that she would find the idea of a world where she could help others from a position of power without all of the death and chaos and destruction appealing, and her outrage at Rudolph for once again putting her in a position where she has to witness (and potentially be responsible for) terrible things happening to innocent people is believable. He proves that being a Gorotainian royal is like being the Last of The Time Lords. On a smaller scale, sure, but still. 

So the text (and Donna) have set up the idea of Rudolph being similar to the Doctor in role, so what is the difference? Rudolph doesn’t much care about people. He is willing to sacrifice his own people quite coldly.

The Doctor does care about people. How good of a person he is, or how good of a job he does caring for people is up for debate, but he cares.

Which all leads me to this quote from “Beautiful Chaos,” that I cannot believe is cannon and real and published.

Why does Donna love the Doctor?

"I wish you could see what I see. We've been to places, to worlds, to futures and pasts you could only dream about. I think half of them I dreamed up because they can't be real. But they are. And everywhere we go, we make a difference. We put things right, we make people happier. That's what the Doctor is all about. He finds a way for the universe to make sense. And I love him for it.”

Donna Noble wants to make a difference. No matter where she goes, she cannot escape the death and pain and suffering and chaos and nonsense that is the universe, and she can’t help but want to help. And right there beside her, the Doctor is working to put things right too. And she loves him for it.

We have this entire drama dedicated to Donna wanting to make a difference, while also escaping the darkness of the universe, and she learns she can’t. There are no happily ever afters.

Except with the Doctor.

I have so many feelings guys.

[le-trash-prince]

I will say, Kidnap is turning out to be as pulpy as I was initially hoping it would be.

It's fast-paced in a way that BL rarely is—our hero finds himself in a new predicament every week, struggling to balance his situational needs with his moral code. He's fighting off loan sharks, his brother has health issues, he's struggling with a kidnapping that he's not emotionally committed to, he's falling for his target, he's getting involved with the mafia, and soon enough, the police will be on his tail.

It may not be as heavily sexual as some pulp can be, but Kidnap bears markers of erotic and romantic pulp stories—it's tinged with situational bondage, we have a sadistic villain, and its romance is built on a contrast of high danger and emotional tenderness. As a romantic lead, Min is both strong and vulnerable, while Q plays a "damsel in distress" who is smart, snarky, and more capable than he seems.

Because I'm not fluent in Thai, I'm not comfortable speaking to the wittiness or snappiness of the dialogue, but the show is funny, and the comedy brings a levity that such a fast-paced story needs. Not all shows dealing with heavy topics like loan sharks or mafia need a lighthearted or silly aspect, and often this can be out of place, but when you are moving as quickly as Kidnap, those heavier elements can feel like a constant barrage.

I won't declare that the show was for-sure going for a pulp feeling, but it certainly bears the markers of a lot of pulp literature. Pulp weeklies (which, incidentally, made a lot of their money off of advertisements x), needed stories that would keep their readers coming back week after week. How will Min get out of this predicament now?

Overall, I hope that people can take Kidnap as it is without judging it for failing to achieve something that it's not trying to accomplish. Pulp may not be for everyone, and that's fine. It's certainly not high-brow literature, it was made to be accessible to the masses, but many great writers got their start in pulp, and the pulp era had a lasting impact on modern storytelling. Personally, I tend to really love things with strong pulp influences, so I am being well fed by Kidnap. Maybe that will change in the future, but so far I have enjoyed each episode more than the last.

[championari]

Something that I keep coming back to regarding dead boy detectives, and how it differs from so many queer shows regarding coming out and realizing you're queer.

It's not just shown, it is EXPERIENCED.

We aren't just shown an Edwardian teen having a sexual awakening, we are put right in the middle of that storm. they throw those images right in our faces and make us hear the Cat King's sexy voice in our ears.

We aren't just shown that same teen dreamily looking at the object of his desires. we are put into a POV shot, softening the background noises and making Jayden Revri look as drop-dead gorgeous as possible for one moment.

I just finished my first class in film school, and one of the things talked about frequently was perspective. How the audience views the story, and how that viewpoint can color our experience of it. Whether we root for a character or against them.

The show takes an experience that may seem to people as 'other', as too different or alien to straight audiences, and puts said audience in the middle of it. They are frequently placed in the perspective of a gay Edwardian teen discovering who he is and in doing so, place their faith in the audience that they will understand.

Dead Boy Detectives uses the language of cinema to make its audience identify with a queer character on a primal level. That is something I never thought possible. and yet, when you think about it, it is so simple.

[yuri-puppies]

ok now that my joke post about how kabru looks like an evil advisor but is actually just a guy helping out his friend by providing an accessibility need has over 10k notes, are we ready to talk about orientalism and the evil vizier trope and how the whole meta joke of kabru as a character is that he triggers all of these red flags associated with brown antagonists but he's actually a really upstanding guy? and how that panel is a continuation of that joke?

[definitely-not-an-alb]

Tombs of Atuan is such an insane novel (yassss gurl lead that thirsty old man to the spring hidden in your secret holy cave :3) and I mean this 100% seriously: it's only good because it's a Jungian nightmare (complimentary). The fundamental problem of writing a novel containing some kind of untouchable magic secret at its heart is that story demands the secret be revealed at some point, but revealing the secret immediately makes it loose whatever lustre it possessed. Le Guin introduces a secret beyond the secret that remains by necessity of the target audience textually unspoken throughout. It is so omnipresent the actual magical mystery becomes irrelevant to maintaining the narrative tension and is so tantalizing the reduction of the actual - I forgot what type of jewellery needs stealing, proving my point - magic McGuffin to, well, a McGuffin, is barely noticeable. Despite the metaphor being so present in the text the plot never stops making sense, and between it and the unspeakableness of the subject in the readers' and writer's mind both, the latter half takes on this lucid dreamscape-like movement. It's the narrative equivalent of tasting that one perfect bite of a deliciously umami morsel. One could say it lingers on the tongue like - (I am forcible removed from speaking further at the children's book conference)

[drakaripykiros130ac]

I just want to take this moment to applaud the confirmation that we still have rational people in the Asoiaf fandom.

The last shit show episode was marked down as the worst ever.

A big round of applause to common sense!

👏

[mactiir]

I know the average reading comprehension on this site is zero but I'm different. I'm applying wildly inappropriate analysis lenses to popcorn media. I'm doing a queer theory reading of Horus Heresy novels. Now I'm doing feminist analysis of Warhammer 40k canon. Now I'm applying Marxist analysis to The Outsiders. Time for a historical analysis of The Locked Tomb. A post-colonial reading of the entirety of Doctor Who. A psychological anlaysis of Twilight. On the horseshoe scale of reading comprehension I'm at "so much reading comprehension that it loops back around to not understanding books at all actually". You can't stop me. I'm literary analysis Georg