#mostly i want to point out that tangle’s characterization HAS objectively changed whether you like one or the other more

[leori-the-unlearned]

rereading IDW sonic is giving me a better picture of just how skewed tangle’s recent characterization is :(

i know continuity marches on and all but man. tangle is the only one getting THIS bent out of shape all the time and it sucks. she’s the everyman (she really shouldn’t be) and keeps getting mistaken for a different character trope by each new arc’s writers

[ihavethoughtsplural]

Blood and Chocolate: An Adaptation in Name Only

Previously: Section 0 - Introduction

Section 1 – The Book

Preface: The 1997 novel Blood and Chocolate is DENSE.  The paperback only spans 264 pages, but the story follows the coming of age of a dynamic and flawed female protagonist, encompasses ancient werewolf legends and laws, goes in depth into lycanthropic politics, and also features a love triangle, a teenage soap opera, a forbidden romance, and a goddamned murder mystery.

Summary: Vivian Gandillon is a 15-year-old werewolf.  A year after her father was killed in the fire that destroyed their home, Vivian is lost and grieving while her leaderless pack falls apart in the Maryland suburbs that they fled to.  Aiden, a tall, gentle human classmate attracts her attention and presents Vivian an escape from the tangled, animalistic world of werewolves.  Keeping her lycanthropy secret, Vivian begins to date Aiden, defying the laws of her people.   Vivian is pressured to break things off by her mother, her five delinquent age-mates, and the would-be leader, Gabriel. Gabriel, a 24 year-old welder, is attractive, intimidating and the object of intense romantic competition.  He, more than any other, tries to convince Vivian that her dalliance with a human is dangerous, eventually revealing that he speaks from painful personal experience. The story twists and turns, tearing Vivian and Aiden apart while pulling Vivian and Gabriel together.  In the end, through many trials, Vivian discovers that she can’t escape either her human or her animal nature, and must embrace both.  

Themes: Vivian’s central character arc finds her struggling with what she wants as opposed to what she needs.  At the opening of the novel, Vivian wants to escape the violent chaos of her pack, with its painful history and uncertain future. She finds that escape in Aiden, with his Beaver Cleaver family, his lovably quirky friends, and his sweetness and simplicity.   However, when the time comes to reveal the hidden aspects of her identity, Aiden can’t handle it.  Despite his supernatural curiosity, he cannot accept the supernatural when it presents itself to him.  His rejection sends Vivian into a tailspin of self-destruction that only ends when she accepts the love that Gabriel is offering, a love that honors all of what she is.  To ultimately find happiness, Vivian had to give up what she wanted and embrace what she needed. In addition to this, there is also a great deal of time in the novel spent contrasting the human and the animal sides of Vivian’s nature.  Her two suitors Aiden and Gabriel represent, respectively, the human and the animal. Scenes of Vivian socializing with Aiden and his human friends are juxtaposed with scenes of Vivian’s werewolf pack brutally vying for dominance.  The very title of the book is a reference to this dichotomy, Blood – representing Vivian’s animal desires, and Chocolate – representing Vivian’s human longings.   Throughout the novel, Vivian swings between these two extremes, at one point drinking herself into a heartbroken stupor over Aiden, then blacking out and waking up in her bed next to a severed hand. She tries, in her romance with Aiden, to balance her human and animal sides, but she only achieves that balance with Gabriel, a partner who also exists in the grey area between man and beast.

Highs: These are the aspects of the novel have captivated my imagination and kept this book in my collection for so long.

o   Werewolf Society:  It’s a damn shame that Klause hasn’t written more stories within this framework, because it is absolutely ripe for exploration and development.  The enormous potential here is one of the primary reasons why this book has held my fascination for so long and why I have written so much (published and unpublished) fanfiction for it.

o   Flawed Characters: No one who’s read the book will tell you that Vivian is perfect or even likeable 100% of the time, but it fits with her characterization as a grieving, lost teenager and serves to make her all the more like an actual person.  Most of the characters are like that, with their good qualities balanced or sometimes overwhelmed by their less savory sides.  It makes the fictional world feel richer and more realistic, despite the supernatural elements.

o   Consequences: The characters in this novel make real, awful mistakes, and they face lasting consequences for them.  One of Vivian’s mistakes – maiming Astrid while defending her mother, directly leads to Vivian’s ex, Rafe, getting sucked into Astrid’s revenge plot, leading to Vivian being framed for murder and the eventual executions of both Rafe and Astrid, during which Vivian is accidentally shot by Aiden.  

CONSEQUENCES!   They make the story more believable, more suspenseful, and this novel, with its cast of flawed characters, would not have worked without them.

o   Assertive Female Protagonist: Vivian is refreshingly frank about her desires, which is very noticeable in her courtship with Aiden.  Aiden assumes that he has to advance their physical relationship slowly so as to not frighten or offend Vivian, while Vivian urges him on.  She doesn’t hesitate when going after what she wants, and she’s not ashamed of her sexuality.  It’s a welcome change from the restrictions that western society places on female desire, and I’d like to see more characters like her.

Lows:  Blood and Chocolate is far from perfect, but, in my opinion, there are three glaring flaws in this book, and I would be remiss if I didn’t address them.

o   The Esme Question: The first point is one that, once seen, cannot be unseen. Vivian’s mother, Esme, is one of the women competing for Gabriel’s affections at the beginning of the novel.  It is established that they go on dates (“Saw your mother go into Tooley’s bar with Gabriel last night.” p. 18), but Klause is not explicit about how far their relationship has gone.  This ambiguity leaves open a potentially disturbing possibility:  

It is canonically possible that Gabriel had a sexual relationship with Esme and then moved on to sexually pursue her daughter, Vivian.

Personally, I can reasonably believe that Gabriel and Esme never progressed beyond idle flirting because:

a.       Vivian strikes me as the type of person who would mark her mother’s sexual partners as “off limits”.

b.       Up until just past the Ordeal scene, both Esme and Astrid are still fighting over Gabriel, implying that neither of them had really “won” him.  

c.       The possibility outlined above seems like it would be a bridge too far to be included in a YA novel, especially in the 90′s.  

Your mileage may vary.  I’ve seen reviews of the book whose negative ratings hinge on the fact that Gabriel dated Esme at all, irrespective of whether their relationship was sexual or not.  Honestly?  I can’t blame them.  If the mere existence of this possibility squicks you out, then it’s likely going to sour the ending and ruin the rest of the book for you.

o   The Age Differences: The second point is the least defensible. At the end of the novel, Vivian is 16 and Gabriel is 24.  That minor/adult 8 year age gap constitutes a “yikes” in my part of the world.  Klause skirts this by establishing that werewolf society has some stark differences with human society, namely that a 16 year old female is considered an adult by werewolf law.  This is still a rather uncomfortable detail to be included in an American YA novel, and the older I get, the more uncomfortable it becomes.

In addition to the Vivian/Gabriel age gap, there is the even wider Astrid/Rafe age gap. Rafe is Vivian’s ex and age mate, although there are reasons to assume that he is slightly older than her.  This places him somewhere in a probable 16-18 age range. He is canonically younger than 21, which makes him, according to werewolf law, not yet an adult.  Astrid has a son who is also Vivian’s age, which places Astrid somewhere in her late 30’s to mid 40’s.  In the book, Astrid and Rafe have a sexual relationship.

To be fair to Klause, this is framed in the novel as being toxic and ultimately destructive to both Astrid and Rafe.  Near the end of the story, Rafe finally realizes that Astrid has been taking advantage of him, turning Rafe, in my opinion, into a tragic victim of manipulation.  

Let me leave this segment with a PSA:

If you’re reading this and you’re underage, please don’t enter into a “relationship” with an adult.  The adults in these scenarios in the real world are predators, and they’re preying on your inexperience and naïveté.  They know that you probably won’t recognize relationship red flags and they think they can pressure you into doing unsafe and unhealthy things in the name of “love”. Stay safe, kids!

o   Sexual Harassment:   My third and final low point is one that I have very mixed feelings about.  As a result, this is the longest segment of this post, so strap in. In the novel, many of the interactions between Vivian and male characters are inappropriately sexual.  The most egregious offenders are the Five, Gabriel, and Aiden’s father. The Five, Vivian’s male werewolf peers, are crass, rude and arrogant.  Led by Rafe, they display a lot of entitlement for Vivian’s affections.  The most pointed (and gross) of these displays happens on p.41:

“You’re not Princess Wolf now,” Rafe growled behind her.  “Wait too long and we’ll take what we want.” 

That?  Yeah, that’s a direct rape threat!  Rafe also goes on to grope Vivian at her birthday party.  He’s a peach!   Gabriel’s harassment mostly takes the form of unwanted advances.  It peaks after the Ordeal, the battle royale where Vivian accidentally wins the right to be Gabriel’s mate.  In the aftermath, Gabriel corners Vivian in her kitchen, forces a non-consensual kiss on her and declares his intentions to court her.   Aiden’s father is notable in the contrast he provides.  Vivian only interacts with him once, when Aiden invites her to a family cookout. During this scene, he repeatedly leers at her, makes suggestive comments and on p. 79:

Vivian could hear the innuendo in Mr. Teague’s voice.  It made her skin crawl.

However, if you compare Mr. Teague’s harassment to Gabriel, the Five and others, you’ll find that there is a significant difference in Vivian’s reaction.  Vivian isn’t afraid to bite back at the Five’s harassment – scoring vivid revenge for Rafe’s groping when she injures his genitals.  She tries to do the same to Gabriel when he forces a kiss on her, but he relents on his own.   We see a similar dynamic when Esme snaps at Bucky, another male werewolf, who catcalls her in a bar.  This forms a pattern which suggests that forceful sexuality is a feature of werewolf culture.  Vivian confirms this the first time that she and Aiden kiss on p. 51:

“He was gentle.  She hadn’t expected that.  Kisses to her were a tight clutch, teeth, and tongue.”

And this is where my mixed feelings come in. I don’t condone the harassment that Vivian experiences, but I understand why Klause wrote it.  Any author writing inhuman characters can’t simply tell us that they are inhuman, they have to show it.  The forceful sexuality of the werewolf characters in this book is one way that Klause clearly shows that they are NOT human and serves as a contrast to the human characters.   But where does Aiden’s dad fit into this?  His harassment is milder than the Five’s or Gabriel’s, but it disgusts Vivian in a way that the other harassment didn’t.  Why?  Sexual harassment seems to be a constant feature of her pack life.  This isn’t even the only time that an older man leers at her – on p. 115, in the same scene where Esme gets catcalled:

Some of those male eyes strayed to Vivian, too, and she preened at the thought of being a threat.

That’s a far cry from the skin-crawling disgust she felt with Mr. Teague, but it’s basically the same offense.  What’s different?  We find it in a conversation with him on p. 74:

“I would think a girl like you would go out with someone older.” He winked at Vivian. Like someone your age?  Vivian thought, repelled by the man’s lack of loyalty to his son.

Vivian’s disgust stems from the fact that the man flirting with her is her boyfriend’s father.  She’s shown to welcome sexual attention from other older men, and she has no problems handling more overt harassment, but the paternal disloyalty sickens her. The overt sexual harassment is there, and if it makes it impossible for you to enjoy the book, I don’t blame you.  Your feelings are valid, and I’m not going to tell you that you’re wrong.  Personally, I understand the authorial reasoning behind its inclusion, and its utility as a characterization tool, so it doesn’t prevent me from enjoying the story. Your mileage may vary.

Verdict: The 1997 novel Blood and Chocolate is flawed, but fascinating.  It sets multifaceted characters into a tantalizing world of men and monsters, where the line between good and evil is blurred into nonexistence.  It is, despite its problematic elements, my favorite book.

Next: Section 2 - Adaptation Challenges

[csolarstormhealthjournal]

"I don't think I can just blow this off Morty.  If I had known it worked this way, I wouldn't have detoxed.  Well, "I" would have because I was toxic.  Now I'm detoxed and I'm accountable to my toxins, right?  It's a dilemma."

This quote is what made me gush about tonight's episode of Rick and Morty, and I have to go into long detail about my experiences in order to explain - to myself, primarily - why it spoke to me.

Well, first of all, I don't like the idea of calling people "toxic", most directly because my old best friend framed my behavior that way back in 2009.  Obviously my point of view was, and most people corroborate this, that there was no malice or intent behind my "toxicity", but that I was stuck in a terrible situation where I was suffering, in pain, and often trapped in a hospital, and kept almost dying before I could recover from the previous “almost dying”.  I also had a pretty transparent post-traumatic episode where I told her that I was scared to go back to the hospital, and then when she told me to think positive, I snapped at her and basically said “bullshit”, that I needed to feel negatively.  She didn’t deserve that, and didn’t accept it, but it was what I was going through.  We went through this cycle again when I called her asking for emotional support when the doctors accidentally mixed my seizure medicines.

Basically, the way in which I was toxic, or abusive, was just based on how my behavior affected her, and not a full objective characterization of what was going on, because I was stuck in a situation far beyond my control.  (But she wasn’t.  She could choose to remove herself, and did.)  And I definitely reflect on this a lot; how much was my behavior due to how I chose to react to my situation; whether I could have just taken it all in and chose not to vent it toward people who didn't deserve it, been more conscientious and/or put up a better front for my loved ones - but maybe these aren’t even the right questions to ask. 

To respond to someone suffering a situation beyond their control by telling them they can help themselves by just choosing to react in a certain way is messed up.  There’s a time to realize your circumstances are a result of your decisions.  Psychologically, this is a healthy approach to have in most circumstances.  However, when we covered this in psychology class, the issue gnawed at me, and I asked how it applies to people who are in situations they can’t control.  So it turns out the corollary to this idea is that when you really are in a situation beyond your control, it’s obviously unhealthy to ascribe the situation to your own decisions, and in these situations it’s more healthy to acknowledge that you are NOT in control. 

Basically, the idea that you get what you earn is great for people who want to (and can) succeed, and well…toxic, for lack of a better word, for people who are dealing with situations beyond their own control.  And that's what I’ve been sorting out for years.

But the quote itself.

At age twelve, I decided to return to my chromosomal gender, and not soon afterward, I started having intrusive thoughts and some compulsive actions. To what degree these two things are connected might not even be the point; I mean, in roughly the same period of time, I left my special education school behind, lost contact with most of my special ed friends, and went to homeschooling to spend most of my time at my desk in my bedroom. The gender change may have just been the straw on the camel's back.  And my mom has alluded to having intrusive thoughts too, so there's also the possibility of heredity considering our DNA is a wreck.  We both have scoliosis, for example.  (Even though mine was nearly lethal, so...not entirely comparable.) 

At first, there was a period where I just took the intrusive thoughts at face value, and for a while I was legitimately “religious” in a superstitious sense, afraid of being under supernatural assault.  It actually took a year or two before I realized I was just having mental problems.  (Part of it was that it was so inconceivable to think I was “insane”.)  At some point I realized that if I was going to acknowledge the blasphemous things as not real, I'd have to accept the possibility of them - the scenario of losing the gambles, being damned, etc.  Now I’d know this as exposure therapy, but it made sense at the time.  And so after a while of taking the intrusive thoughts less seriously, as an effect I kind of became more secular, or at least not religious in any fundamental way, and started objecting to the idea of being “pure” in a theological or a moral sense, seeing it as a facade to hide the fear of confronting something that was necessary to confront.  I mean, the intrusive thoughts completely did not match my own moral standards, nor did the way I was reacting to them, so I kind of embraced the idea of being impure.

Additionally, I realized that the more time I spent thinking to myself alone - even learning, musing, things a scholar does - the more vulnerable I was to getting my mind tangled in itself so to speak.  So I consciously decided to embrace distractions.  I held myself to a regiment of video games and entertainment. Something I'm still very much, definitely doing today.

So there's two ways right there in which I, oddly enough, became accountable to my toxins. Instead of continuing to frame the issue as a fight against internal evil, I had to accept the intrusive thoughts in order to acknowledge the reality of what was ultimately glitchy and misguided chatter coming from my own head.  But in a way, this superstitious and strict time of my life improved me in some ways.  I learned to write during this time, listened to a few political issues for the first time.  I didn’t stay vegetarian or keep celebrating All Hallows Eve even though I decided Halloween was celebrating fear.  A lot of strict standards that I put on myself were beneficial, but ultimately some of it wasn’t balanced in the long run because it was more about avoidance than belief.  Avoidance that neglected "accountability to my toxins".

That wasn't it though, because once I started taking the testosterone injections, I went through the whole thing again.  I went back to the superstition and in a worse sense, because I was exposed to more to be superstitious about, with a brain that was restructuring to be critical under the testosterone's changes.  In a way, the synthetic testosterone is kind of a toxin to me, because I only acquiesce to it through choice.  I spent my first twelve years with this standard of femininity and this apprehension toward men and masculinity, and then I ended up chemically invaded by a drug that makes you masculine.  It's a kind of ironic punishment.  I got on a soapbox about men's rights because I lived the opposite attitude toward men that I felt alienated by once I accepted that I had to figure out how to live comfortably as a man.  When you're a little girl, it's easy to think "boy stands for bad, girl stands for good", but when you're a man, it's  frustrating to see that everybody thinks it’s a nitpick to be upset about these attitudes.  (“Of course women can hit men.  Men are brutes that need to be kept in check.”  Well, I’m a man.  “Well, you don’t count.  You’re not a typical guy.  Not until you do something that a typical guy would, then you count.”)

So though I had a hell of a time fitting in my new skin with these new personality traits that don’t always mesh well with the person I grew up as, I advocated for them because I realized it was a matter of respecting myself and the person I was, regardless of how secure I was in being that.  It's another way of being accountable for my own toxins.

The point here might be that we ultimately have to care for ourselves, including the parts of us that need the most care, however difficult it is to care for the parts of you that are the hardest to like.  My intrusive thoughts were just technically intrusive.  They were, somehow, just a cry of instability from inside me, something I could only untangle to a certain point by confronting them, and then maintaining that instability in some sense instead of trying to eradicate it somehow.  The humanist response ultimately worked.   And the issue with the testosterone, ultimately, worked with the same logic. 

And bringing it back to this episode of Rick and Morty - this is probably the most complex post I’ve ever written about my past because of a cartoon episode - I thought the way that they made a science fiction plot out of the figurative pop culture psychology concept of “toxicity” was brilliant, and I didn’t know how much I needed it.  They took this flawed concept that I associated with a terrible time in my life, and applied it in a way that was constructive, in a way that it mostly functioned the way everybody wants to use it, but also in a way that showed the flaws of the way it was misused.  And on top of that, during their metaphorical exploration, they covered one aspect of it that seemed to speak to an very specific issue in my life that nobody would really guess about.  That’s cool.