#murdoc fans who are also critical fans are also valid

[greywindys]

Hey I'm the anon who asked about sad murdoc discourse and thanks for the answer! I can understand that yeah maybe to old fans murdoc changing a bit could be another example of gorillaz going more "PG" and they probably also rightly feel like their losing something else that was nostalgic to them(one dimensional evil murdoc) but while I agree with that I also agree with you that I'm here purely for murdoc and I'm one who enjoys redemptive/healing arcs across all media so this progression was great to see and sort of poetic for the character! As I said earlier too is that murdoc changed "a bit" in that while I see him slowly mellowing out in some fields with the other band members I still am of the belief that murdoc was always a chaotic neutral person just now with some chaotic good moments, not all that diffrent and I hope to see more healing and progression as that was just a small but needed start!(if gorillaz can remain a bit consistent with his character😓)

Yeah, no problem! We're pretty much on the same page re: Murdoc. I never saw him as completely "evil," even during P1 and P2. He's always seems like a complicated, sad little man, but I've also always gotten attached to morally questionable characters, so part of that is just me, and how I interpret things.

Sad Murdoc was such a refreshing change for me because of the points you brought up - redemptive/healing arcs are so satisfying with the right characters. For me, Murdoc is the right character. The descent of Gorillaz embracing capitalism complicated matters, and one could argue that Murdoc was "redeemed" for the wrong reasons.

However, when you place Murdoc's development in the context of the fandom community from 2017-2019, I find his " arc" (calling it that for brevity's sake) unintentionally meta and powerful. I think a lot of new fans don't know or forget how awful certain groups of fans were to Murdoc fans - not even shippers, this was toward anyone who liked Murdoc even a tiny bit. It was hard to have any sort of discussion about him, or share any kind of fanwork without someone reminding you that he was evil and that any nice or neutral thing you brought up about him had to have a disclaimer that none of that actually mattered because he was an irredeemable person who didn't deserve any happiness in his life, ever. So, fast forward to the end of 2019 with TLC video where we see a character who's not this one-dimensional villain receive acceptance in the most straightforward way possible and shatter all the past arguments that he's "evil and you're all just watching Gorillaz wrong." It was incredibly validating for a lot of fans. So, yeah, I understand the perspective of critical fans, but I’ll always be on the side of "Murdoc fans deserved this W."

[tothedarkdarkseas]

Hi, I just want to say that I adore your characterizations and your interpretation on the 2Doc dynamic — it’s refreshing to say the least, lol. Idk, I’m a sucker for bleak, unhealthy relationships. I’m not sure if you’ve ever been asked this, but I was wondering how do you address the criticisms of 2Doc as a ship, or problematic ships/characters in general? As someone who is involved in a few ships that some would deem as ‘problematic’, I find it difficult to fully articulate my stance on shipping as a concept. Of course I don’t think shipping is synonymous with believing the characters could realistically be in a healthy, productive relationship, but I still find it hard to address the (often valid) criticisms of the ships I like without fear of it verging on romanticization of an abusive or toxic relationship. Anyway, love your stuff and hope you’re doing well! ❤️

Thank you so much for your incredibly kind message! That means so much to me, thank you. And you’re not alone, I too am a sucker for bleakness! This got a bit long so it’ll be behind a cut!

This is an interesting question, and one that I fear has an unsatisfying answer. When I think back on the ships I’ve had strong feelings for, there are a few I’d call uncontroversial, but most often I am interested in human drama; it isn’t so much an obsession over the story being “dark,” but the complexity and conflict that comes from two people having problems, which they may or may not overcome. And there arises the issue: there’s a marked difference between a relationship being problematic, and being problematic. 2Doc is, in fairness, both, and I just try to steer it toward the former.

To be frank with you, the fandom has been fractured for a very long time, and I’ve always felt a bit alienated from both the glorifying of abuse, and from the “wholesome” excuses that arose counter to it. (I don’t try to position myself as an authority or very universal on this, so I apologize in advance, and hope other fans understand that we’re coming from similar places and simply have different paths there.) I think if you look through 2Doc discussions of the past few years, you’ll see a lot of the same talking points about how it was problematic but they’ve since healed, or that it is a narrative of growth and forgiveness, or a similar approach of acknowledging toxic history but refuting that their content is at all toxic. I completely understand why this is the popular argument, but it isn’t the one that resonates with me. They’re not wrong for saying it-- this is fandom, therefore authors are crafting their own narrative, that’s sort of the point of doing this, but-- do I think my narrative is about forgiveness? Not really, no. Do I think it is fair, then, to categorize it with the abuse porn which delights in removing Stu’s autonomy? No, I don’t agree that’s fair either.

I respect those who like to create and consume happier stories, but speaking purely for myself, I think you run a risk when you choose to present an unhealthy relationship as “fixed,” or navigate around valid criticism by saying they’re all better now, or worse, arguing it down. Despite good intentions, it minimizes the longterm damage that a power imbalance like this does, it disregards the responsibility of one or both parties to actually live with consequences for their actions even if those consequences are only interpersonal, and most frustrating and damning to me, it denies Stuart the right to be angry, vindictive, or hurt in a way that does not flatter the romantic tragedy of trauma. I do know that this is harsh, though. I understand that isn’t the intention, and I know it comes from a place of loving the idea of this kind-hearted martyr figure-- but idealizing forgiveness no matter the toll is not a healthy mindset and I don’t see it as fair to Stuart. I do think that in the real world people understand the dangers of guilting victims with this mindset, but this is fiction, and it’s nice to dream up a story of tilling the dead flowers from the soil and tending to it, nourishing it, and growing something beautiful from it. I completely get that, and I don’t fault people for it. It just isn’t what I’m writing for, and so this conversation never really satisfies me.

For me, I find it best not to circle around or try to disprove these points, but rather to meet them. Yes, we agree it is not an aspirational relationship or one the characters should wisely pursue. I think a critical fan reading my stories and attacking the relationship’s portrayal as unhealthy would be kind of a moot point, because I’m not presenting it as anything else-- but it is my hope that the characters are compelling and not merely an edgy, ghoulish spectacle. There are moments in my Sad Nonsequential Extended Universe where they banter playfully and where they share an intimacy that is (to their chagrin) romantic in its singularity, but at no point is the relationship whole, at no point is Murdoc apologetic in a way that Stuart is obligated to forgive. Speaking only for myself, that is the joy of writing, and that is what I come back to these characters for. I feel fulfilled by the unfulfillment, and I feel it is entirely possible to tell a story about cruelty and remorse without chaining either character to a leaden ball of either redemption or sainthood. And-- and this is the big and-- I think it’s possible to do this without reveling in trauma either.

There is a difference between appreciating human folly, codependence, and resentment as ever-present cracks in a foundation, and glorifying, romanticizing, or fetishizing a character’s lack of agency or suffering. It has been hurtful, at times, to feel there is no distinction made between bleakness in service of a story and abuse simply for its own sake.

It doesn’t thrill me to read Stuart as powerless against Murdoc, a pretty and broken thing too weak to escape, and it doesn’t thrill me to read Stuart as utterly benevolent to Murdoc, existing only as a bridge Murdoc may walk across to get to the next stage of his own story. I don’t think Murdoc wants Stuart to be that, either. I don’t think they could ever be wrapped up in each other for so long if he thought so little of him. And truth be told, I can acknowledge that this is now my narrative running away with me, this is something I’m choosing for them based on a characterization and history that doesn’t really exist, and for that reason I can’t fault anyone for finding the argument less than compelling. I can also acknowledge that this sounds a bit grand for a bunch of oneshots about bad sex and substance abuse, so, er, I’m sorry for that too.

Here’s where the unsatisfying bit comes in, about writing and discussing flawed characters without excusing or admiring their faults: I just think it’s something you know. If you ask a baker to tell you when you’ll know the dough is the right consistency, they may suggest you compare it to the softest part of your thigh, but they’ll amend that they don’t really think in those terms: they just know it when they see it. The best I can offer is that I find candor to be essential in conversation, and I think it’s a good idea to worry less about disagreeing than effectively communicating your interest in weighty storytelling. I think being able to take a step back from the impulse of defensiveness, knowing that you are a respectful and empathetic person, knowing that you have these concerns about romanticization and about invalidating fair concerns, is the absolute best thing you can do. Talking is not about winning! I hope this response was helpful at all! Thank you for your question!