#meta ( satine )

[agoodflyting]

Why Aziraphale is completely ridiculous in the Bastille scene (and I love him so much for it)

A while ago I posted a comparison of Aziraphale and Crowley's costumes in the 1793 flashback in Good Omens and I wanted to add these little tidbits. (Because they haunt me.)

I feel like most people know this but IF YOU DON'T, Paris in 1793 is right in the middle of something called La Terreur.

HISTORY LESSON If you didn't learn this in school the French Revolution was when, after years of escalating social tension, a coalition representing the working classes of France revolted against the monarchy, violently overthrew King Louis XVI, and declared France to be a republic.

The new National Convention governing France ruled that King Louis XVI and his wife Marie Antoinette were traitors to the people of France because of how they had spent ridiculous amounts of money on luxuries for themselves while vast numbers of the lower classes were literally starving to death. (keep the bold in mind - wealth and class disparities were one of the key causes of the whole-ass revolution)

In 1793 (year of the flashback) both the King and Queen were executed by guillotine for their crimes.

This kicks of something called The Reign of Terror (La Terreur if you want to be French about it). A multi-year-long period in which the National Convention goes on a bloody witch hunt for any and every member of the middle or upper classes who could even possibly be considered a traitor by those same standards.

If you A) had money or privilege, and B) had ever used your money or privilege to treat yourself, you were getting executed. Over 25,000 people died during the Reign of Terror, half of them by guillotine. In fact, the iconic guillotine was used because it was physically impossible to keep up with the sheer number of people they were executing in Paris every single day.

Some things that could get you killed (actually and completely seriously) during the Reign of Terror:

Implying in any way you were sympathetic to the monarchy

Having a noble title

Having expensive things

Wearing expensive, luxurious clothes (*cough* AZIRAPHALE)

helping or sympathizing with anyone who did any of the above

a working-class person saying you were mean to them once

And then there's this bitch...

I AM NOBILITY PLEASE KILL ME So we have established that Paris in 1793 is in the middle of a frenzied, state-sanctioned bloodbath in which the working classes are massacring everyone even remotely nobility-adjacent. And in the middle of this frenzy, Aziraphale proceeds to roll up in Paris in this outfit:

How will this outfit get him killed? Let me count the ways...

First off- at this point everyone with even the tiniest shred of self- preservation is hiding the fact that they are in any way associated with the monarchy. The wealthy are straight-up abandoning mansions. The middle-class are plastering over decorations to make their house look 'poor'. The only people dressed remotely decent are the guys leading the National Convention and that's just because nobody can stop them. Everyone else is in 24/7 peasant cosplay or else they are covering themselves in cockades and sashes on to show they're pro-Republic.

Aziraphale is basically a giant shiny white sign saying I AM NOBILITY PLEASE KILL ME.

First off the lace jabot and lace cuffs are both associated with the old-school wealthy in the 1790's.

His coat is also decorated in gold braid and silver buttons, which are both marks of wealth and luxury.

He basically looks like he works for Louis XIV - not just rich, but old school rich.

We know it's his natural hair color, but hair powdering (with clay and starch) had been a big trend with the rich all throughout the 18th century to get that clean white venerable look . To someone who doesn't know it's natural, it would very much look like he's wearing hair powder.

He's wearing shades of cream and white, which are very hard to keep clean and clearly states that the wearer is rich and can afford the upkeep necessary to keep an outfit like that stain-free.

He's wearing white knee-breeches and stockings, also called culottes. See above about laundry and how rich you had to be to wear white, but also working-class men wore long pants like this:

A large faction involved in the Revolution were the Sans-Culottes (no-culottes aka we wear long pants LIKE GOOD OLD WORKING MEN). Culottes are specifically associated with everything the revolution hated. That's right - Aziraphale is literally wearing The Fanciest of Fancy Pants in a city where a group called The Men Against Fancy Pants are running around murdering people.

And then there are his shoes.

Oh god his shoes

I could do a whole post about Aziraphale's blessed little white satin pumps and how ridiculous they are.

Actually I might just do that because this is getting so long and I still have to talk about the brioche.

So I can't remember if it's in the script book or if it's from Neil Gaiman's tumblr, but it's apparently canon (?) that Aziraphale was going around in that outfit asking people where he could get crepes and brioche when he was arrested.

The Affair of the Brioches

So... uh... we've all heard the line attributed to Marie Antoinette- how when she was told that her people were starving because there was no bread left in Paris, she famously said...

It's morphed into 'let them eat cake', but the line is first recorded as, "Then let them eat brioches."

While it's unlikely she ever actually said it, the important thing is that... people in 1793 would have thought she said it. It was used as political smear to show how arrogant and out of touch the monarchy was. Marie Antoinette in particular was reviled by the people of France, who thought she was the main cause of their economic problems. That's why she was executed too.

Bread and brioche and the lines between poverty and privilege were a big thing in Revolutionary France. There was a lot of political connotation to what you ate. The French Revolution came about because of decades of suffering among the lower classes of France. It wasn't something that some dudes just decided to do. The people of Paris have been through years of the absolute worst, most oppressive poverty and starvation you can imagine, all while watching the rich throw money around crazy.

So let us recap.

Aziraphale is dressed so ridiculously posh that he looks like a joke parody of a nobleman... and he is bumbling around Paris during the Reign of Terror. Asking people. For brioche. How I imagine everyone looked at him:

It is so astoundingly tone deaf and tactless. He is basically cosplaying as Marie Antoinette and then going around asking the poor for cake.

I just.... Aziraphale. babygirl. no. oh no. You're lucky they even bothered to take you to prison. I am amazed Crowley ever let him live that down.

I have no conclusion other than this. Aziraphale is ridiculous and I love him so much.

YES YOU REALLY SHOULD SIR.

[fantastic-nonsense]

the deliberate erasure of Padme Amidala and Satine Kryze from every piece of Star Wars media where it would be narratively and thematically relevant to mention them is absolutely insane

because how did we get to a place where we can have two separate shows that collectively co-star three of Padme's best friends and her child and only get one (1) oblique mention? How did we get two whole shows focused on Mandalorians and post-Imperial Mandalore, one of which co-stars Satine's sister, and not mention the Last Free Ruler of Mandalore? How did we get a show focused on Obi-Wan Kenobi and not mention one of his best friends or the love of his life? How did we get a show focused entirely on politics and spying and the true birth of the Rebellion and not mention the fact that Padme helped build that? How did we visit Sundari and not mention Satine? How did we get an episode where Ahsoka literally attends Padme's funeral and never once says her name?

The fact that Satine is essentially confined to The Clone Wars despite her sister being the current co-protagonist of Disney's flagship Star Wars show while Padme has been basically erased from every single piece of Star Wars media that isn't the Darth Vader comics is baffling. It would be like Leia being completely non-existent and never mentioned in the sequel trilogy despite it co-starring her son, brother, and husband. It makes no sense, it's clearly deliberate, and it's extremely irritating.

[bolithesenate]

Satine Kryze should not be a sympathetic character.

A complex and tragic one? Sure. Every day of the week.

But she did not 'have a point', neither in-universe, not outside of the sw framework. She isn't a hero, neither of her own story, nor of someone else's. There is no way she wasn't a tool. You should not look at her and think 'this woman has done nothing wrong and what ultimately happened to Mandalore was to no part her fault'.

Because guys. Friends. Strangers on the interwebs.

Pacifism doesn't work.

And it certainly wouldn't have worked in motherfucking Star Wars – the 'wars' is literally in the title – for a system or series of systems who wanted to stay neutral.

YOU DON'T STAY NEUTRAL FOR LONG BY JUST SAYING 'YEAH, NO THANKS <3' TO A LARGE-SCALE CONFLICT.

source: I am Swiss, we've looked at this in history class. Extensively.

Satine was a dreamer (thanks Obi-Wan) who was allowed to keep her delusions because they actively benefitted Palpatine's plans. And that's something you can quote me on. There is literally no other reason (apart from supremely bad writing but we'll leave that aside here) for her and her little friends' 'Alliance of Neutral Systems' or whatever to be allowed to exist.

Not that they were neutral in any way, shape or form, by the way.

So yeah sorry to the Satine stans, but you're idolizing a character that was written exclusively and specifically for Obi-Wan's manpain and who, in-universe, was a supremely bad politician. Because the level of mental dissonace needed to factually be a Republic System, have a seat in the fucking Republic Senate, rely upon their military for aid while actively proclaiming that All Violence Is Bad And Barbaric one sentence later AND THEN CLAIM TO BE NEUTRAL IN THE WHOLE CONFLICT – it's just mind-blowing. Even moreso that people actually look at this character and see something aspirational in her.

Again, I'll gladly dissect her character any day of the week. She is fascinating because of all the implications her existence as a head of state carries with it, as well as her deeply complicated family history and her relation to mandalorian culture.

But it just grates on me personally that that all gets ignored in favor of her being some sort of icon of white american saviorism (bc that's literally what she is) and her objectively bad political takes being treated like they are the only correct stance to be taken during the Clone Wars/Mandalorian Civil Wars.

If you think pacifism works and actually lets you stay neutral, I desperately urge you to open a history book. Because those two are mutually exclusive. Especially in the scenario that Star Wars paints.

[gffa]

There were at least three separate points in this episode where I was on the edge of my seat when Bo-Katan was talking about Mandalore’s history of fighting each other, of her own role in things, where I was sure they were finally going to say her sister’s fucking name, to talk about Satine’s vision for Mandalore, to talk about Bo-Katan’s feelings about stepping into her sister’s shoes, not necessarily to do it the same way, but her conflicting feelings about being someone trying to achieve the same basic goal of healing her people, to talk about Bo-Katan’s own role in fighting and spilling Mandalorian blood against her own sister’s rule, to talk about Bo-Katan’s major role in Death Watch’s history, they brought up Death Watch this episode and she was right there in the scene and I’m willing to give some leeway that I do think she must have at least been thinking about Satine, but it’s getting Real Fucking Telling that this show refuses to say Satine Kryze’s name.  She’s from the same series that Bo-Katan is from, she’s not some obscure bit of trivia that might confuse fans!  She’s from the same series that Bo-Katan is from.  There is absolutely zero reason for Bo-Katan not to say her fucking name.

[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.

[darth-jess]

Obi-wan truly loved Anakin. I’m talking canon Star Wars, and I’m not talking about ROMANTIC love (honestly I envy the Greeks who had so many different words for the different kinds of love and as English speakers we only have one, as if there is only one kind of love and that’s very annoying but also a completely different topic) I’m talking about purely platonic love. And he did love Anakin, so so much.

Not in that characteristically distant way of the Jedi, but as family, as a BROTHER. He loved Anakin in a way that no Jedi should ever love anyone. And I think Anakin created this kind of love in other people because he was such a loving person, himself.

Anakin loved fearlessly, always. Anakin was never afraid of expressing himself, never afraid of baring his heart to those he cared about. He was never afraid of showing those he cared about that he loved them.

And even though Obi-wan was very rigid in his ways, even though he was often overly-adherent to the rules of the Jedi, he absolutely broke the rules about attachment when it came to Anakin.

You see this in the Revenge of the Sith novelization by Matthew Stover, where Obi-wan is having a conversation with Mace Windu and Master Yoda, and Obi-wan tells Master Yoda, "You and I have been close since I was a boy. An infant. Yet if ending this war one week sooner–one day sooner– were to require that I sacrifice your life, you know I would." He goes on to tell Master Yoda that Anakin is not like this, that Anakin would never sacrifice the lives of those he cared about for the greater good. And then, Obi-wan goes on to tell the two Jedi Masters that he would also stop at nothing to save Anakin.

You see this in the way he at first refuses to kill Anakin when Master Yoda asks him to, even after seeing Anakin kill younglings.

Obi-wan would literally rather face Sidious and die than have to kill Anakin.

And you see it in the way that he cares for Luke and Leia for the rest of his life.

I think Obi-wan often comes off as keeping Anakin at "arm's length." Anakin definitely feels this, as he is constantly looking for validation, approval, and even love from Obi-wan. And while Obi-wan feels it, he is not the best at showing it because Obi-wan did not grow up with a family. He does not know how to show this kind of love.

Anakin, on the other hand, lived with his mother for 9 years. He knows the love of family, and he shows it to everyone he considers family-- Padme, Obi-wan, Ahsoka, and Palpatine.

Obi-wan holds himself back from Anakin, not because he didn't care about Anakin the same way Anakin cared about Obi-wan, but because he cared too much.

If he had allowed himself to fully accept the depth of attachment and love he felt for Anakin, he probably would have questioned his role as a Jedi, as he questioned his role as a Jedi with Satine.

There are three people Obi-wan truly loves: Qui-Gon, Satine, and Anakin. He would have done almost anything for these people. He tells Satine he would have left the Jedi Order for her, if she'd asked him to. And he breaks the rules of the Jedi Order to allow Anakin his secret relationship with Padmé because Obi-wan loves Anakin enough to allow him that happiness.

It is only fitting that Obi-wan dies at Vader's hands, completely at peace, while protecting Anakin's children who have finally been reunited.

[evaarade]

"Mandalorians didn't want to change, Satine merely forced them to"

Except, no she didn't and and yeah they did.

Here's the thing, we are told that the majority of the people wanted the change and were New Mandalorians, we are told that the only people who weren't were a small minority that had been exiled for causing a damaging war on the planet and population

And it was That minority that kick started Mandalore falling, that brought wars back to Mandalore, that took over via trickery and deception because the majority were Happy with Satine so the only way that said minority could take over was by making her seem incompetent and convinced the population of exactly that

Mandalore was a tragedy in the Clone wars because people WANTED to change, they were HAPPY with the change that Satine brought, but because an Extremist Minority didn't like it so they all Suffered

George Lucas said that the Prequels were a story about how a democracy fell, and I see The Clone Wars Mandalorians as another chapter of that, but this time it wasn't because of the civilian inaction, it was because while the people did Everything Right, they suffered under things out of their control and an Extremist Minority used propaganda and staged attacks to take over at the first chance they had.

[mrfandomwars]

There Is something to be said about Satine aka the Duchess of MANDALORE being chosen to lead and represent 1500 Neutral Systems.

Sure she started the whole thing but like, idk man, it seems like people trusted her And believed in Mandalore's strength enough to agree to join her neutral system council, when they could have well created it separately and simply invited the Mandalorian Sector to be a member and yet she was chosen to lead it, she made it and she led it and 1500 believed in her and followed her example

[duchess-of-oldtown]

Satin is just Jon's steward. Satin takes care of Jon, makes sure he eats, asks him whether he's slept and stares longingly at him... Jon spends time teaching him how to fight, worries about his safety, defends him, shakes off the gay rumours, watches him dancing at the wedding, notes how pretty he is at least once a chapter.

Yeah, he's just his steward.

[citizensun]

honestly I do ship JonSatin but not in a SHIP ship kinda way and more in line with the whole Mary Magdalene/Christ Allegory idea. they are friends but they are also follower and leader and they have perceived duties and stations BUT they still manage slowly become closer and more tender and honest .............. and then it all takes takes a dramatic U-turn as the epilogue comes by because my ideal endgame for Satin is for him to get a cushy job in a castle somewhere and my ideal endgame for Jon is for him to become a semi-mythical lost figure they sing about like they sing about Orpheus in the end of Hadestown. do you get me. brought together by chance and separated by fate. maybe they'd had a chance if Jon were merely a bastard but unfortunately he is a prophesized hero-prince and Satin is just Satin. because this is feudalism and they ultimately belong in different classes even if they're both bastards. maybe they'll meet again someday, can't that be enough?

[misspermitted]

Not to randomly appear in this fandom and rant, but it’s like missing the whole point of Obi-Wan’s character arc to blame Anakin solely for screwing up that relationship. It takes two to tango. Anakin was selfish and immature, but so was Obi-Wan! He:

Never told anakin he cared, or any of his emotions. Thus screwing any possible emotional connection

Never expressed in any way that he was proud of him and instead repeatedly complained about him

Brushed off or mocked all of Anakin’s attempts at affection

Like Obi-Wan really didn’t give Anakin many reasons to believe he’d support him. Anakin was self conscious and desperate for affection, which made him easily feel unloved and alone. But Obi-Wan did not help by hiding any love he had for Anakin due to his fear of attachments.

Why did Obi fear attachments?

Obi-Wan had no family and Qui-Gon was the opposite of affectionate. He didn’t know how to show love, and he didn’t want to fail. A Jedi doesn’t fail. They do or do not. So he did not.

Obi-Wan had to let go of Satine, his first relationship, and it broke his heart. Because Obi-Wan loves devotedly. Anakin loves passionately like a fire, but Obi-Wan loves like a worshiper. He keeps promises and quietly worships the ground the person walks on. And he had to let the object of his worship go. Unlike Anakin, Obi-Wan can let go, but he doesn’t forget. Obi-Wan never wants to lose anyone. It feels like failure. He is terrified of losing his attachments.

Before Qui-Gon Obi-Wan has this encompassing desire for approval which, from Qui-Gon’s constant abandonment throughout their relationship (he’s such a deadbeat), sharpens into a fear of rejection. Obi-Wan doesn’t want to be rejected by the Jedi Order, so he becomes the perfect Jedi. He doesn’t want to be rejected by Anakin, so he makes himself necessary. He’s so terrified of rejection, that he never puts himself out there to be rejected. So he deflects and deflects.

Then of course there’s the Jedi Order forebading attachment. It’s very per-Jedi how that is defined, Qui-Gon commits to this by being very ungrounded and “going with the force”. This does not work for Obi-Wan. He is a stressed little Jedi. He is so unbelievably grounded. He cares about everything. He can’t not. So he represses and pretends to be this very strict person he isn’t. And you can tell this looms over Obi-Wan. His inability to meet this expectation. His inability to be indifferent. Because Obi-Wan doesn’t like failing.

And by the time he figures out that he can be himself and show affection, and finds his middle ground of loving and caring altruistically, it’s too late. Anakin already feels too alone. And because of all the other fears we’ve addressed, Obi-Wan is too afraid of rejection and loss to actually reach out really clearly.

“He’ll be fine.” He thinks. Except he’s not fine. Anakin is not fine. And all of Obi-Wan’s fears happen because he puts his head in the sand and pretends he’s not attached. It’s so counterintuitive. Like just talk to him!! Admit you care!!! Oh my gooood!!!! It’s Shakespeare level miscommunication.

But by Luke Obi-Wan has learned from his mistakes, he’s so affectionate and nice to Luke when he trains him. So “I’m proud of you.” So positive reinforcement.

It takes him comedically long to come to the basic realisation that if you want your younger sibling to know how much you care for him just, like, tell him?? Miscommunication and you taking on everything and feeling unappreciated isn’t an inevitable fact of life. You can just communicate?? And show affection?? The Jedi Order isn’t stopping you???

But hey I wouldn’t love Obi-Wan if he wasn’t a mess.

[agoodflyting]

Why Aziraphale's White Satin Pumps Are Ridiculous (And I love them)

So this is a continuation of the lengthy rant I posted here about Aziraphale's outfit in the Bastille scene of GO and all the ways it would have pissed people in Revolutionary Paris off. I got to the shoes and realized they needed their own post.

Aziraphale's Blessed Little White Satin Pumps

To recap: in 1793, Paris is in control of The People, who are making up for decades of oppression and poverty by beheading the fuck out of everyone remotely nobility-adjacent. And into this mess strolls one Angel in white satin heels.

Some facts about this style of shoe:

The buckle means they're specifically court shoes as opposed to streetwear. Buckles were out of fashion unless you were hanging out with royalty and needed to look fancy. Everyday shoes had laces by this point.

This heel style for men is specifically called Louis Heels because they were popularized by Louis XVI. Y'know... the king Paris just beheaded in 1793. Here's a pair in a similar style from the late 18th century:

One big difference you may notice in Aziraphale's shoes and the ones above is that the ones above are normal, practical leather whereas Aziraphale is wearing white satin shoes. This is because Aziraphale is ridiculous.

The Allure of White Satin Shoes

In this modern world of laundry machines and affordable shoes I feel that people do not fully understand how absolutely over-the-top ridiculous a pair of white satin shoes would be to people in 1793.

First off lets address the fact that they're white:

If you have ever known anyone who was super into sneakers, you know that keeping white shoes white is a full-time job. It was even more so in the 18th century. The fact that Aziraphale is wearing perfectly clean white shoes says one thing: "I am rich enough to be able to pay someone to clean these, and to replace them when they invariably get stained."

And they would get stained. Oh would they get stained.

Because he is not wearing them for their intended function - lazing around indoors. No, he is wearing them on the streets of 18th Century Paris. And 18th Century Paris was fucking disgusting.

Kind of like how London had its famed London Smog, Paris had its own brand of filth. A unique Parisian muck made up of mixtures of mud, offal from the slaughterhouses, animal waste, human waste, household garbage, and rotting dead animals, all mashed down into what a British visitor called, "A thick, black, unctuous oil, that where it sticks no art can wash it off."

Voltaire said: "We blush with shame to see the public markets, set up in narrow streets, displaying their filth, spreading infection, and causing continual disorders…" and called Paris a city, "Partly of gold and partly of muck."

This is a city with over a million people, with no central plumbing, and no public sanitation laws. Households threw their waste in the streets. Businesses like tanneries and slaughterhouses threw their waste right out into the streets. Horses were the main mode of transportation and nobody was cleaning up after them. It was apparently a thriving hustle that Parisian beggars would hang out in the worst areas with big pieces of wood, and charge wealthy people money to walk on the board over the worst puddles of filth.

That's where Aziraphale is wearing his pristine little white satin shoes. In a city so gross it has its own world-renowned stinking black mud.

And on the subject of those shoes, lets look at the satin part... By the 18th Century, France was no longer dependent on Asia for its silk and satin. There was domestic production, but it was still expensive. A book about the cost of living published in London in 1770 lists the price for a single yard of satin at just over 18 shillings. For comparison, here are some other things you could get for 18 shillings in London at the time:

two box seats at Covent Garden

six barrels of oysters

a really nice wig

a week's wages for a skilled tradesman

15 steak dinners

3 secondhand coats So the outer fabric alone on Aziraphale's shoes cost what it would take a skilled worker about a week to make. Again, that's just for the fabric. Since the shoes themselves were high quality, would be handmade, and required skilled labor, the shoes themselves would be expensive even without the satin. In 1788 a pair of leather gentleman's court shoes cost about 6 livres in France. By comparison, a pound of bread, which was considered a day's food for a peasant, cost roughly 10 sous. So we'll roughly estimate that Aziraphale's shoes without the satin cost the equivalent of 12 days worth of food for an average person.

And, I cannot stress this enough, he is wearing these white shoes, which could easily feed an entire family for weeks, in a city that is abso-fucking-lutely filthy with stinking, staining, sticky mud.

Aziraphale's shoes, probably:

I mean - imagine you're a normal everyday French peasant during the Revolution. You spend decades struggling to feed your family, and some dingbat walks up to you in white court shoes styled after the king you just executed. Shoes that cost more than you make in a month, which he is wearing around your notoriously filthy city with apparently 0 fucks given for the fact that they will be absolutely ruined and will have to be thrown away. (Obviously Aziraphale could just miracle them clean but you're a revolutionary peasant, you don't know that.)

And then this walking audacity asks you for cake.

Aziraphale, hon, you are so lucky they decided to try to execute you and not just like. jump your dumb ass in an alley and steal your pretty little white satin shoes.

[smhalltheurlsaretaken]

(repost of this with the video directly in the post because vimeo links are acting up)

Rewatching this scene for the sweet angst, something struck me. In hindsight it's extremely obvious but I'd never thought about it this way.

There's the very obvious parallels with Qui-Gon's death, down to Satine caressing Obi-Wan's cheek, there's that amazing bit of mirrored exchange, where Obi-Wan starts off confrontational and angry and Maul gloating, and then Obi-Wan becomes soft-spoken and empathetic and Maul starts to shake with rage and pain and can't even properly face him, and then there's this.

Maul boasts that the Dark Side is "more powerful than [Obi-Wan] knows," that Obi-Wan's "noble flaw" is a weakness, so why is he trying to make him more powerful? Why tell him to use the Dark Side? Why basically give him a crash course about how it works? Does he want Obi-Wan to retaliate? To escape?

The obvious answer is that Maul isn't trying to make Obi-Wan more powerful. After all, he's well aware that Obi-Wan is a dogshit fighter when he's angry.

Immediately after that last quote, he says "that is not the Jedi way, is it?" as a taunt, and again in The Lawless, he insists "You should have chosen the Dark Side, Master Jedi."

So he's simply trying to destroy him as a Jedi, right? Because he knows that's what make Obi-Wan who he is, and he blames Obi-Wan for robbing him of his status along with his life, so he wants to destroy Obi-Wan's life in the ways that matter (since, as Obi-Wan says, just killing him is nothing like destroying him). But if that's the case, then we're back to the "power" issue. What's the point of destroying Obi-Wan if it's by giving him what Maul claims is his own identity, and the key to freedom?

And imo the answer lies right here:

Why would killing Satine make Obi-Wan share Maul's pain? Why would Maul regard the pain of losing a loved one (something he's completely unfamiliar with at this point) as equal to his torment? Why isn't he chopping Obi-Wan in half and keeping him alive with Nightsister magick instead? Why would the murder of one of Obi-Wan's loved ones, picked almost at random, be THE "moment" Maul has been thinking about "for years"?

I think he really isn't talking about Satine's murder in and of itself when he talks of pain. The pain he wants Obi-Wan to share isn't the pain of loss, but very simply the pain of living in the Dark Side.

That's why Satine really is just a "tool" to his vengeance, as he says, and not the main point. That's why he's so enraged that Obi-Wan insists on showing him compassion even through his fear and anger - being kind leaves you open to grief but protects from the agony of the Dark.

Maul wants Obi-Wan to Fall, to stop being a Jedi, not because he truly believes the Dark Side gives you good things, but because he knows the Dark Side makes you miserable.

He tries to freaking teach Obi-Wan how to Fall, like Obi-Wan is a Sith apprentice, because being a Sith is the most miserable you're ever going to get! He tries to make Obi-Wan suffer by making him like him! He's so self-loathing his hatred of Obi-Wan materializes as self-hatred!

And hey, that greatly complements the end of the episode - Obi-Wan resists the Dark Side and escapes the planet, and Maul revels in it and immediately loses the only person he cares about and ends up crawling and crying while Sidious gleefully tortures him. Maul falls victim to every form of suffering he wanted to inflict on Obi-Wan and Obi-Wan flies away. In the end, Maul is proven right: being Fallen really f*cking sucks.

Really accentuates that Maul wanted relief above all when he sought out Obi-Wan in Rebels. He went to the only person who had shown him actual compassion, and the person he knew was best at resisting the Dark Side - so he could finally be free.

[marvelstars]

Anakin & Padme vs Obi-Wan & Satine

I have some thoughts on both of these relationships especially because I enjoy both but I don´t like when some fans use one to put down the other in terms of their relationship with the Jedi Order

First off, Obi-Wan and Satine deciding to go on their own way because Satine had a duty to her people and Obi-Wan wanted to remain a Jedi despite loving her is totally in character to the kind of people they are and what they care for, Obi-Wan was raised at the temple, he didn´t know his birth family, the order is his world and Satine didn´t want to put him in a position of leaving his world for her world and she most probably wasn´t going to leave her duties to her destroyed planet as the heir of Mandalore, especially after a civil war.

In this I agree with the majority of fandom, in what I disagree is the fact that Satine and Obi-Wan decision not to pursue a romantic relationship is a legitimate one while Anakin and Padmé´s choice to begin one is selfish and a show of attachment, I believe both decisions and both relationships ARE legitimate, after all being a Jedi is a choice and just like Ahsoka showed, you can leave without being made an enemy of them precisely because the Order is supposed to offer this freedom.

Anakin was born in a family, he wanted to become a Jedi to be able to free the slaves on Tatooine, later he had to sacrifice this dream to remain a Jedi because freedom of slaves on Tatooine or the outer rim simply wasn´t a priority for the Jedi Order because they did mostly what the Senate asked of them and freedom in the Outer rim wasn´t something the Senate cared about at all.

In this scenario Anakin falling in love with Padmé, the girl he helped when he was a slave on Tatooine, the same one he promised to help free her planet which he ultimately did, is a good and honest feeling, just as Padmé´s auntentic feeling of wanting to have a family with Anakin once her period as Queen was done, so she could execute her plan of them going to live on Naboo once her time as a Senator was done.

Anakin´s decision to leave the order to built a life with Padmé and a family is a legitimate decision. At no point did he wish to impose his pov on the order or make them change their oppinion on marriage, his position was simple, he could not remain a Jedi if he was married to Padmé, he stayed during the clone wars to help the order but he had already decided to leave once peace was achieved and who could condemn him for that? if that decision could very well have led to him finally achieving his childhood dream of freeing the slaves once he wasn´t a subject of the Senate dictates as a Jedi? especially given Padmé´s help and influence on Naboo could have helped in achieving this and who knows, without Palpatine´s direct influence over Anakin, this could have helped fulfill the chosen one prophecy in a better context than ROTJ

In both cases, the characters are making a decision that makes sense given their background and point of view which is completely legit, even in the real world, life long compromises of the kind monks/ catholic priests make, they are made aware they have a choice if they ultimately decide to live their life as part of a family and that it´s an honest and legitimate decision, in fact catholic priests are given a whole year to decide before making their formal votes.

So in Anakin´s or Obi-Wan´s case, while the Jedi Order certainly didn´t take well seeing their members leave, it wasn´t banned, it was a legitimate decision one could take if the circunstances led to it as Ahsoka showed and I believe this is the least they can do given they take their members so young, before they are able to fully understand the decision they are making.

My two cents.

Double date by Ame

[gffa]

Favreau can pluck the relatively minor character of Cobb Vanth from the Aftermath books and give him a fairly prominent role in not one but two of his series, can remember that Brendol Hux was part of the attempt to rebuild the Empire and go so far as to cast Brian Gleeson in the role, can bring Gilad Pellaeon into live action, but refuses to put Rae fucking Sloane’s name in his mouth?  She who had a far more central role in the Aftermath books and was an important leading figure in the Imperial remnants?  Just completely ignore her existence and neither of the unnamed women from that meeting could possibly be her character?  I see.  Coupled with this season’s absolute refusal to say Satine fucking Kryze’s name, I’m starting to give Favreau some serious stink-eye.

[retailther4py]

give me a satine kryze who hates her father. give me a satine who was her father’s greatest failure. give me a satine who was an embarrassment to him. give me a satine who has not forgiven him. give me a satine who is not entirely sad that he’s dead. give me a satine who was just a child. give me a satine who is angry. give me a satine who survived.

give me a satine who understands that her father embraced pacifism toward the end and doesn’t care. give me a satine who cannot forget his war-mongering. give me a satine who inherited a tainted name. give me a satine who spits on her father’s grave.