#my choice is not relevant nor up for debate

[surreality51]

One day, your name will be the one that is called

...and on that day, you will be grateful that laws are written to support personal liberty and autonomy, and not to impose the moral judgments of the few on the many. 

I’ve been tracking the abortion debate in the US for decades, but I never thought the issue would impact me personally. I thought if I ever had an unplanned pregnancy, I would choose to keep the baby. But I was staunchly pro-choice and voted as such, because I supported every person’s liberty to make their own choice, even if it was different from my own.

Last week, the abortion debate suddenly and unexpectedly became very, very personal. 

I’m currently 22 weeks pregnant with our third child. Our first two children were delivered without complications; my first pregnancy was so smooth that even my OB (joking but not joking) commented that she was jealous. We went in for our 20-week anatomy scan thinking things would be the same this time around. 

They were not. 

For those who have never had to face a doctor delivering devastating news in a compassionate voice, words cannot describe the tsunami of emotions that slam into you in that moment. It was without a doubt the worst moment of my life. My doctor explained what she did and did not see in the scan, potential diagnoses and further recommended testing, and what our options were. Because we live in California, we had until viability (24 weeks) to decide if we wanted to continue the pregnancy. As a medical professional, she would support us in whichever way we decided to go.

I knew from all my years of reading that only 1% of abortions are performed after 20 weeks. I just never thought that one day I might become part of the 1%.

The abortion debate in the US after the overturning of Roe v Wade has ranged from liberal states like New Jersey and Oregon protecting access to abortion with no gestational limits, to conservative states like Idaho and Tennessee with full bans that provide no exceptions for rape, incest, fatal fetal abnormalities, or risks to the life or health of the pregnant person. 

For many people, abortion bans are theoretical, rather than an immediate threat to their life, liberty, and family. Many people, including many women, think that they will never be personally affected. And it is easy to pass judgment on others, and assume that your position is the only moral position. 

My experience last week shows that this is a privilege that can be taken away at any time. My husband and I debated going for a third child for a long time, but finally decided “you only live once.” We were shocked and elated to get pregnant on the first try. I took my prenatal vitamins, abstained from deli meats and undercooked food, and did everything you were supposed to do during pregnancy. We took out the newborn clothes from the storage box and put them in the dresser with our older children’s clothes. We dusted off the baby carrier and newborn car seat. And then we went in for our 20-week anatomy scan.

When you’re facing the worst moment of your life, the last thing you want to be thinking about is “at least the government has granted me the right to choose what’s best for me and my family.” And yet here we are, in the year 2023, in that exact situation. I never thought I would be here, I never wanted to be here, but because my state government and my fellow citizens understand that pregnancy is a life-changing, uncertain, fraught, frequently life-threatening, and intensely personal situation, I at least have the freedom to choose the right path for me and my family.

One day, your name will be the one that is called, and on that day, you will be grateful for the rights and liberties granted to you by a compassionate society. 

[blueathn]

Obligatory coffee shop au art

Close-ups and ramblings under the cut because I spent waaay too long on this

Welcome to my brain soup.

Disclaimer, I didn’t really plan this piece and just kept adding concepts as I went, so it’s kind of all over the place. It’s more a big patchwork of dumb ideas I got excited over, rather than a well thought-out drawing, but I like it as it is! It feels like my brain did when I was reading htn :]

1. The whole concept behind this is just "Vintage coffee ad but make it the griddlehark coffee shop au". I was aiming for cheerful but also not quite right, in a very stock photo kind of way if that makes sense. Gideon is smiling but she is not a willing participant in this. Also that coffee is cold.

I - very predictably - took inspiration from Leyendecker’s work, since his ads and posters are the first that come to my mind when I think "vintage ad", and also because I do feel like his painting technique is close to how I naturally paint. This is not meant to be a study of his style tho, I didn’t try to break it down on more than a very superficial level.

2. 3. Nothing special to say, just Gideon’s arms (her perfect biceps are hidden from view lest they cause a riot in the cafeteria). Also arm hair. I feel like it’s becoming a recurring feature in my art lol

4. I debated whether or not to add a foam skull on the coffee then ultimately decided against it. That’s one skull too many, and honestly Gideon neither has the skill nor the patience to attempt one. Let’s be real, if they let her have access to the pitcher she’d make tits. So here is your tits-free coffee, courtesy of the Cohort photoshop editors.

5. Isaac, sporting the Fourth’s blue not only in dress but also in his questionnable choice of eye makeup. They have matching haircut only so Jeanne can showcase how much better it looks on her.

6. This is where I finally have something clever-ish to say. Thoughts ! I have them ! Sometimes. So. Harrow. You can’t see it but she has a nose piercing as well - this is relevant to spreading my agenda that Harrow is full of bone (piercings, that is). Sue me, I forgot that they let her keep her face paint in this scene. Onto the actual thought process.

This is where Abigail interrupts the scene, before Harrow can catch a glimpse of barista!Gideon. Her interruption is shown by the unfinished look of this panel : the sketch lines peeking through (in a reddish hue, to mimic sanguine, the red chalk that artists used to draw sketches and studies - and also because the contrast of the colors makes it pop better against her skin) + the rendering is messier from the neck and down.

Abigail is blocking half of Harrow from view - I wanted to have her hide Harrow’s eyes and thus line of sight entirely, but I feared Harrow wouldn’t be as recognizable with more than half her face hidden, frowny eyebrows and all.

Abigail herself is meant to look out of place here, without taking too much attention away from Gideon. I drew her in a much simpler style, using a more monochromatic palette and cell shading, to contrast against the rest of the gang, where I used a lot more color variation and a more detailed & textured painting style.

That’s about all I have on this, if you got this far thank you! Your support is much appreciated. If you liked this drawing I’d be overjoyed if you reblogged it and left your thoughts in the tags/notes! I’m always happy when I read them, even just a "#nice" makes my day.

[lxmelle]

I have just been thinking about Sukuna’s 2 choices, since I came across some debate over it. It got me wondering…

Idk, I guess I just I felt the urge to write out my thoughts and it’s become this reflective piece about themes and the parallels that exist between some of the characters.

I think there are some salient themes in the series… namely, Pure Love and what it means to be human. JJK is really an incredibly thought-provoking masterpiece.

Please feel welcome to give it a read if you wish. And then you can make up your own mind - it’s totally ok to disagee.

Respectful Discourse welcome.

Spoilers for 271 and some overall thoughts about the end - I guess this is part 2!

And just a disclaimer: these are just my personal thoughts as a reader. Apologies if my tone forms across a bit blunt at times - I get a little bit overzealous.

First off, I guess souls are real after all. The afterlife is real. It’s mysterious, leaves you guessing, and I gather that it’s meant to be up for interpretation.

As a reader, we are allowed a glimpse of continuity for the characters we grieve for and miss dearly… like a “maybe next time...” or “maybe now they will be allowed happiness”.

For me, personally, it’s a relief because it means satosugu in the afterlife is real 🥹 the brainrot is also real

I digress. Sorry I do that a lot.

Sukuna was shown in an unknown realm, facing Mahito. He is alone at first with nobody else beside him.

As they talk, he recalls having had two paths he could’ve walked on relating to two individuals.

Most of us recognise Uraume immediately, in what was probably their original form. The other person dons what looks like a Miko/priestess outfit and a hairdo that is equally befitting of that role.

I personally think it’s Yorozu due to the defining features and relevance to Sukuna’s story. Other speculations have included his mother and Kenjaku or even Tengen.

Personally? I don’t think it’s his mum. And I don’t think it’s Kenjaku. Not Tengen either.

Just going to attempt to go through the options as a process of elimination here. Take it with a pinch of salt because it’s just an interpretation out of many out there.

First off… mother? Imho, it wouldn’t be a “choice” he could make if it was his mum - you can’t “choose” your mother. It’s not a path... his mentioning of her was apathetic at best and was in passing on the grand scheme of how he was depicted. He seemed to have sympathy for her due to the impoverished nature of her pregnancy, and while it is true that he could have benefitted from a much better childhood / parental circumstances, I don’t think, in the context of having choice of paths to traverse, it is relevant here for it to be his mother.

Second… Kenjaku. Well… He already chose a path with Kenjaku. That’s why he became cursed objects? He already took that path. And it diverged. There was no other possible attachment to Kenjaku. Kenjaku also already used his twin’s soul as a means to his own end, which Sukuna found gross. So yes. Not Kenjaku, imho. They were not friends nor did they have unfinished business to explore. They were a means to an end for one another, as far as i understand. It’s done.

Third: Tengen. Hmm, sorry but it isn’t plausible. The two were in their Heian form. Tengen was pictured to have had fair-coloured hair.

The most likely candidate is Yorozu. Imho, for what it’s worth. The timeline fits. She and Uraume lived in, and were pictured to have been around together, with Sukuna, at the same time in the Heian flashback.

In terms of appearance, too. Everyone there in that unknown realm is wearing something befitting.

The clothes from the era. Hairstyle - like that of a priestess or noble. It’s a woman. And Kenjaku’s defining feature are his stitches. Gege would be sure to emphasise them if it was Kenjaku. Dark hair, not Tengen. Unlikely to be his mum (never been pictured and it’s kinda too late to introduce someone new in the last chapter).

Most notably: The bangs. The bangs. The defining feature of Yorozu are her cropped & stylised bangs. When Yorozu incarnated in Tsumiki that was one of the things that was specifically defined.

Yorozu was strong. She was feared, revered and probably worshipped as a result. She may have had the priestess-like hairdo even if she was from a rural area and drawn to prefer being unconventionally-dressed undressed.

He recognised Yorozu’s presence and accepted her challenge. There was a promise that if he lost he would marry her. If he was dead he would be bound to her in a ritual. But he would never allow himself to willingly succumb to “love” or be bound to anyone in this lifetime. That was what he chose. So it seems logical to me that it was Yorozu is the one there in the image because there existed a choice with both options that he didn’t take in this lifetime. To love her and give her his solitude.

She saw his loneliness. She said it was love. She wanted to give him love. She wanted his solitude (so she said). She wanted him to witness the love that was in her flesh.

So for that reason I think she was equal to Uraume in terms of being a possible choice out of 2 choices that Sukuna could have chosen to walk a path with.

It’s perhaps only fair that I voice my reflections over Uraume.

With Uraume he allowed them to follow him and serve a function, respecting their skill & talent for preparing human flesh as well as a sorcerer. But the boundary of him showing emotion for Uraume was never crossed. It was always Uraume -> Kenjaku (feelings arrow).

For Sukuna in the afterlife to show more than an, “ah, I recognise you” (like he did in the manga) when Uraume appeared before him. Especially since in their incarnated life, when Uraume was injured by Gojo he barely flinched (in fact, he dodged). Plus, during the entirety of the final battle he spared no thought for Uraume.

I can easily headcanon that when he saw Uraume give up their life after he did, the thought of “to think you’d go so far for the likes of me.” For the first time, for Sukuna to acknowledge Uraume as a choice and to physically lead them to go with him, the feelings arrow is now Sukuna -> Uraume & Uraume <- Sukuna. It’s probably the first time Sukuna ever attached himself to anyone but himself.

And to conjure Uraume’s soul (as we recall from above: he was standing alone at first) and physically demonstrate that he was comforting / treasuring them / bringing them along with him - to me, this was him making a choice that he didn’t make in his lifetime.

Sukuna had a choice between love (to be witnessed) with Yorozu and pure love symbolised with sincerity & selflessness with Uraume.

These are THEMES IN JJK.

Like, there are obvious parallels here.

Gojo. Gojo and Geto’s shared solitude. Gojo wanted to be witnessed as a sorcerer. Geto too, in a way. Gojo wanted that big all-out fight that he could do with meaning in it where he could give it his all. He got it from Sukuna and lost.

Gojo wanted/embodied the loyalty and pure love - the only kind he ever got - from Geto. They were willing to sacrifice themselves for the other, for a shared reason. Someone who understood him. Accepted him. Someone he reciprocated these same feelings with. Gojo had embraced humanity.

They died on the same day, one year apart.

He arrived and sat there in the afterlife with his one and only.

His person, Geto, wept in the afterlife after being acknowledged by their beloved. This to me symbolises belonging and being found.

They died on the same day.

Parallels, Parallels, Parallels.

Sukuna had solitude. It was his own. Yorozu saw it and he accepted the battle & fought with Yorozu. The opposite to Gojo was experienced, where he witnessed Yorozu (just as Gojo was witnessed) and he won. He also continued to defeat and reign supreme, just by being the way he’s always been, as if confirming to himself it was the right choice after 1000s of years — and after all those battles, he was repeatedly shown what it was to be witnessed as a monster. At his end, he gave every single challenger his all & to be given what Yuji tried to give him... he rejected it and died (as he wished) when he lost. In his reflections on the afterlife, well, what do you know: he already had it with Uraume. He already had loyalty and pure love and someone to fight with him until the very end. Someone who understood him. Accepted him. (Sukuna would now attempt to embrace his humanity - kinda symbolised with his arm around Uraume).

They then died on the same day.

He arrived and walked off into the afterlife with Uraume.

His person, Uraume, wept in the afterlife after being acknowledged by their beloved. This to me symbolises belonging and being found.

——

So yeah, I get that “it’s possible” for it to be Kenjaku. It’s possible. Maybe. But... imho, he already chose that path. Kenjaku was the only one who knew how to create cursed objects. So who do you think gave consent for that to happen? Kenjaku already went down that path and reached the end... and that was what we saw.

As for other threads...

There are some salient themes like how sacrifice and meaning in life & death were portrayed as “leaving a legacy”. Take Yuki who told Choso to stop living as a curse and now live on as a human, dying in the process of getting the “back” of the prison realm from Kenjaku. It’s like Maki drawing a line under the massacre and living as a sorcerer. And take Kamo who was willing to die and “let his companions lives burn brightly on my ashes” because he didn’t think he had anyone to return home to. And take Geto who made sure Gojo pursued a better path and asked his family to run away after the parade. And take Gojo who believed the world was better off without him if they had a bunch of powerful allies who wouldn’t leave each other behind.

Sukuna lived a life with nobody to mourn him, but he at least had Uraume and Yuji used the last remaining fragment of him as a talisman.

So I think it’s fitting that he looked away from Mahito and carried on.

Mahito was the mirror for humanity. Sukuna faced that mirror. In this life, he was afraid that the curse as a wretched child would only continue, so he relied solely upon himself and it was imho like a retaliation of the cruelty of the world presented to him.

Sound familiar?

How someone who is human and turn? And the core of the other person was love, but the core of Sukuna was power/strength. Funny how they both were referred to as curses. Exorcised on 24th December.

Anyway, Sukuna was more human than he let himself believe, and he refused to stay with Mahito. Without needing to carry that self-imposed title any longer, having lost and died, he was free to choose something he never got to choose: love.

Symbolically, facing Mahito and the two choices facing away was an interesting choice too. And through the essence of what he was reflecting on, he pondered on a better life (with love?) that was facing away from Mahito, the symbol of hate and wrath.

Again: if Mahito was the mirror of hatred (facing Sukuna) then the other two with their backs to Mahito not only signifies past choices, but possible also love.

So we return to the theme of love. The opposite of hate is love. He was afraid of the curse as a wretched being/rejected/unwanted/hated that might immolate him. He wasn’t able to be anything else in this lifetime. He didn’t know how to. He was not willing to, with the element of fear over the risk of making that choice.

I tentatively interpret it as him not having necessarily embodying hate, but having apathy for connection, due to his blind acceptance that the world represented rejection and hate of him. He ended up being caught in a loop of deep-seated fear over his cursed existence - of thinking he was unwanted, and actively denied himself of any opportunity to absolve this belief. A vicious circle and self fulfilling prophecy of sorts. He just sought to dominate and communicate in a singular way through fighting.

And we know so well of the theme from the origins of jjk 0. Gojo’s anecdotal belief that Love is the most twisted curse. Love makes you weak. Sukuna was afraid to love. If there is a next time, it would be nice to choose pure love that wasn’t tied to being killed or killing or solitude that comes with strength. Just to be loved for who he was. Thus, Uraume over Yorozu.

Love, Attachment. What it means to be human. To taste that life means through feelings and emotions. With others as companions. Sukuna always had that capacity in him, as I kind of pointed out before. Albeit selectively, he offered objective praise and affirmation to others; acknowledging their efforts and seeing it as a form of “love” through wanting to prove their existence and challenging him, The Strongest. Seeing their efforts as “love” he gave it back to them in a safe way he knew that didn’t provide any emotional risk to him. A simple “I acknowledge you” was the extend of his love that was shared through fighting. This was probably a product of his life within the Heian times.

I’d like to think he was heading North to become someone new. He always had it in him after all. There were people who believed in him (Gojo, Yuji, Yorozu, Uraume) even if he didn’t believe in himself. It’s poetic and powerful personal / character development.

Speaking of souls; I found it somewhat interesting how curses have souls. Since, presumably, Mahito was presented as a soul? Or was this a part of Mahito’s CT as a cursed spirit who can touch souls? Hmm!

He should be a soul though, since he got absorbed by Kenjaku and should’ve been eliminated by Rika when they all ran amok in his death. The relevance of cursed spirits possibly having souls and having human-like features has always been at the back of my mind.

Gege inserted yet another moral dilemma for us to chew on: if humans and curses share the same traits and value: demonstrating individuality, emotions, hopes, dreams… then are Humans and Curses not so different after all? What of the 127 people Geto killed at the village? What of countless curses killed by sorcerers? Are they considered exorcisms? Sin is sin? Life is life? Karma is karma? Meaning is meaning?

This was already something I yapped about over direct and indirect harm, perspective/frame of reference being one of the biggest things we ought to appreciate in reading a piece of fiction like jjk. It’s so very true that there is no clear right or wrong, and this mimics real life.

Nevertheless, I personally think the overlapping themes, the parallels, the depth... they were all woven really well. I’ve enjoyed examining it.

Am I satisfied? Overall, yes.

Do I wish for more satosugu? Haha. I’m human. I’m greedy! 🤪 So pin that on me! I have been known to plead in jest that Gege will insert more stsg, and I say it while upholding utmost respect for him as an artist and writer. I... don’t think I feel the same respect or reverence for him as a creator when I read some of the comments against him. Criticism is one thing, but I wish people would keep it inoffensive. Even if it’s said in jest, sometimes it is just distasteful? Or even downright disrespectful...

Pieces of good fiction are meant to make you think. All things considered, this series ended rather gently. It was an overall happy end. Peaceful.

Even theoretically & logically: There are parallels with how the world was a cyclical system akin to the karmic cycle. Humans generate bad karma. In the series, karma is like curses. Those who practice the dharma can purify themselves. Sorcerers who can see them exorcise and purify the curses. So the “new world” was actually impossible unless humans were exorcised. And we know that’s not a plausible conclusion. So the real best option was what we got: peace and hope that the new generation of sorcerers can continue influencing a healthy cycle in the world they live in.

I’m not trying to minimise others’ interpretations of what happened and I’m sure all of us have things are are stuck with trying to digest.

As a creator, Gege can giveth and he can taketh.

Please have some gratitude for the person who created the very series that got you in the brainrot to begin with.

As difficult as it is, lean into what made you feel uncomfortable about what you’re dissatisfied with. It might not be about the author. He doesn’t owe you an ending you’re satisfied with. It’s his vision, so we have to process it in a way that makes sense in the lore.

Sometimes it’s referred to as: radical acceptance. We don’t have to agree. But we must find a way to come to terms with how we feel about it. Or not - but that’s on you. The onus is on you.

As a reader we should not be able to control how an author writes out their vision. I have been appalled by how toxic and entitled some “fans” are. Death threats, “when I catch you GG”, a petition for Gojo to be handled by someone else, etc.

Seriously. It’s one thing to have an outpouring of grief or dissatisfaction, but to react like that is just shameful and unhealthy. Do they really think Gege should give in?

Go write fanfiction, for goodness sake... :(

[thaidakar-is-hot]

Kelsier and Anti-Social Personality Disorder: An Essay

Thank you sooo much for editing this @ladyartichokie! You were a massive help!

Kelsier Essay

I hope the dear reader will forgive my use of a proper noun as I write this essay; it removes somewhat of a formal aspect from its words but I must admit, it does come from a personal place of my heart. While this essay is meant to be persuasive, it’s also meant to be constructive and to drive a point home that I have been musing on for quite a while. This essay has major spoilers for the entirety of the Cosmere. If you haven’t read up to SP3, please refrain from reading this.

In the endless expanses of the Cosmere, there are hundreds of characters whom many hold dear and just as many whom people hate. You could say this is due to the brilliance of the author, who, despite his busy schedules and near constant time spent behind a keyboard, finds time to sign sheets and answer questions. Why is signing sheets and answering questions relevant to beloved and reviled characters? Read on.

Brandon Sanderson answers hundreds of questions, many of whom are inane, innocuous, or silly. Some are deeper, others delve into the basis behind some of his choices while writing. Still others pertain to characters. We get to the meat of it. This particular character is known, through the writing, as a brutal man, who let nothing stand in the way of his goal, who, while cleaving the noble class of his society in twain, uplifted the peasants and upended the thousand-year reign of his deity and ruler. Yes, we’re talking of Kelsier, the Survivor of Hathsin, hero of the Final Empire, and a character that leaves many people puzzled.

Reddit forums are frequented by questions about him. r/Mistborn and r/Cosmere alike have had their fair share of debates, and there was one thing I noticed in many of these: they take the words of Sanderson very, very seriously. Why shouldn’t they? He’s the author, is he not? Back in 2013, Sanderson had a Q&A session where someone asked him who his most disturbing character was. The WoB is as follows:

I_are_pant

1.Which of your protagonist characters do you dislike the most as a person? Taking in account that you know all of their inner secrets and motivations. 2. On the flip side, which of your antagonists do you connect with the most? The Lord Ruler seems an obvious choice as he was misunderstood by everyone for so long. But still, I’m curious.

Brandon Sanderson  This is a tough one, as while I’m writing, I HAVE to like everyone. However, the most disturbing of them is probably Kelsier. He’s a psychopath—meaning the actual, technical term. Lack of empathy, egotism, lack of fear. If his life had gone differently, he could have been a very, very evil dude.

 This Word of Brandon has had a decided effect on the fandom, namely in the fact that critical thought surrounding Kelsier, his motives, his struggles, and his successes, has all but been erased. He has been branded a psychopath, and there is nothing anyone can say against it.

The word “psychopath” is a very negatively charged word. To preface things, I want to be clear that this essay is going to refer to “psychopathy” as Antisocial-Personality Disorder. The term psychopath is very old, and largely refers to individuals with this particular disorder. The traditional definition of psychopath is someone who both lacks a conscience and lacks empathy.

Through this essay, I plan to painstakingly showcase that Kelsier fits neither the outdated term nor the criteria for the actual disorder, through canon book citations. I will break down each diagnostic criteria for Antisocial Personality Disorder (Henceforth shortened to ASPD) and Kelsier’s character traits at large. I wish to not only prove Brandon wrong (It is a very old WoB and I doubt very much he still believes this.) but to prove to the fandom at large that Kelsier is a good man. A flawed man, but a good man. I will also note specific character traits that I feel are of note in discussing him, his motives, and his current ideologies.

(Please note that there are plenty of individuals with ASPD that are not bad people. Your actions make you bad, not your mental health. I will be using terms such as “bad” and “wrong”, but this is in regards to a fictional character, NOT a real life human being.)

Antisocial Personality Disorder is a disorder characterized by the DSM-V as a Cluster-B personality disorder. It shares its family with Narcissistic, Borderline, and Histrionic disorders, and is characterized by a “continuing disregard and violation of the rights of others, occurring since the age of fifteen. To be diagnosed with ASPD, you must show a pattern of three or more of the following characteristics:

·         Failure to Conform with Laws and Social Norms

·         Deceitfulness (Repeated lying or conning of others for personal profit or pleasure.

·         Impulsivity or failure to plan ahead.

·         Irritability or Aggressiveness (Repeated physical fights or assaults.)

·         Reckless disregard for the safety of others.

·         Consistent irresponsibility. (Failure to keep a job or honor financial obligations.

·         Lack of remorse.

Psychopathy is a term that was coined before this disorder was identified and refers specifically to a person lacking in both empathy and a conscience. The term is still widely used today, along with the term Sociopath, often interchangeably. For this essay, I’ll be largely relying on the psychiatric standards set in the DSM-V.

With this in mind, let’s jump into the criteria necessary for one (In this case, Kelsier) to be diagnosed with ASPD. While Kelsier waits in the waiting room, rather annoyed, let’s overview his case file. I will be pulling The Final Empire (TFE), Secret History (SH), and Eleventh Metal (EM). To make things clearer, I am using the Arcanum Unbounded version of SH and EM.

Failing to Conform with Laws and Social Norms

“Yes, he pocketed the gemstones in the vault, but that was more out of pragmatism than anything else.” (SH)

“Individual must show a pattern of Failing to conform with laws and social norms.” This one is tricky, as we are speaking of a fictional character in a brutal society hell bent on slaughtering those like Kelsier. Him becoming a thief was his way of surviving. While a thief, he was known as trusting, fair, just, and great to work with. When speaking to Vin after saving her from Camon’s beating, he explains just what sort of thief and crew leader he is, which puzzles her for quite a few pages as she notices the level of trust he places in other people.

“…Well Dox and I, we’re scavengers too, we’re just a higher quality scavenger. We’re more well bred, you might say-or perhaps just more ambitious.” (Chapter 3, page 56, TFE). After Clubs leaves in a huff, Yeden exclaims that he has to be dealt with, and Kelsier shuts him down.

“You’re just going to let him go?” “…I don’t work that way, Yeden. I invited Clubs where I outlined a dangerous plan-one some people might even call stupid. I’m not going to have him assassinated because he decided it was too dangerous. If you do things like that, pretty soon nobody will come listen to your plans in the first place.” (chapter 4, page 80, TFE).

Clubs, upon his return, remarks he’s heard that Kelsier would never use emotional allomancy to sway someone to his side. “You’re a smoker Clubs. He couldn’t do much to you, not if you didn’t want him too.” “I don’t like Soothers…Men like that…well you can’t trust you aren’t being manipulated when they are around. Copper or no copper.” “I wouldn’t rely on something like that to get your loyalty.” “So I’ve heard.” (Chapter 5, page 87, TFE).

If we mark his thieving and conning as a pattern in this trope, we also have to mark it against Doxson, Hammond, Breeze, Vin, and Clubs, not to mention hundreds of other Skaa and half-skaa that are just trying to live. Thus, this particular criterion is being ignored due to the outstanding circumstances of the Final Empire and how it was run.

Deceitfulness for Profit or Pleasure

“And the third…well, that was Kelsier’s favorite. It involved a tongue coated with zinc. Instead of a knife it used confusion, and instead of prowling it worked in the open.” (SH)

As a con-artist and thief, Kelsier throughly enjoys his trade. He made it a mission in life to con his way to the top of the thieving world, becoming the most “Infamous crewleader in Luthadel” (Chapter 5, page 89, TFE). He loved terrifying the Ire out of their possessions and the orb of Investiture. The man enjoys his profession in life; he didn’t fall into it out of necessity or trick. He even states, in narration of his own in the Eleventh Metal, that when he Snapped as a Mistborn, he immediately gravitated towards Zinc and Brass, as they could “manipulate other people’s emotions.” (Eleventh Metal, page 159). “We’re thieves, gentlemen- and we’re extraordinarily good ones. We can rob the unrobbable and fool the unfoolable…” (Chapter 4, page 75, TFE). That being said, he doesn’t lie to his crewmembers. (Ghostblood’s are a bit different, and I’ll get to that later.) He is upfront and honest with his crew members, never expecting them to go into something without all the information. He has never used emotional allomancy to manipulate his friends. “Despite what Breeze says, it’s bad manners to use emotional Allomancy on your friends.” (Chapter 11, page 212, TFE).

His dealings with the Ghostbloods get a little trickier. I do not think lying to them about having powers has anything to do with profit or pleasure, more, it has to do with his position and what he is. A little mystery aids his position, and I’m sure those closest to him know quite well he lacks powers. 

To sum it up, Kelsier does meet this criterion. He enjoys the con, lives for it.

Impulsivity with a Failure to Plan Ahead

“Oh hell,” Kelsier said. “There’s actually a God?”“Yes.”Kelsier decked him. (SH) Impulsiveness, in regards to ASPD, is described as someone who is not only impulsive, but also fails to plan ahead. To quote the exact text. “Impulsivity with a failure to plan ahead.” They lack any way of preparing for large tasks or what they are going to do in the future. In regards to Kelsier, he can certainly be impulsive. Heat of the moment decisions is one of his major strengths, along with one of his major flaws. He’s fond of brash decisions against those he deems slighted him or others (Punching Leras/Ruin in Secret History.) He will jump headlong into danger in order to save those in helpless situations. (Running to save the army, only to be stopped by Vin.) His foray into Kredik Shaw could be called impulsive, though I read it as him believing that since he didn’t plan at all, there was no way he could be betrayed, as had happened last time. Him taking Vin was certainly a foolish choice, though I wouldn’t call it impulsive.

Speaking of his impulsiveness, other characters are aware of it as well. Vin, inspecting the crates that will be shipped to the caves, says that “Even the new, more responsible Kelsier was an impulsive man.” upon learning he planned to go to the caves with Yeden to inspect the army. (Chapter 20, page 331, TFE).

His slaughter of the noblemen and women in the town of Longsfellow after they murdered a young girl could be seen as impulsive. He did it without regard for their plan,  which angered Mare.

That being said, Kelsier does not fit this criteria, despite being an impulsive man, as he does not fail to plan ahead. All of Kelsier’s life as a thief was nothing but planning; job after job, all planned out and discussed with his friends/crewmates.

“It was an unfamiliar experience for him. [faltering/indecision] He’d always had a plan, before. Plans upon plans…” (Eleventh Metal, page 152).

“…all those plans, all of those heists, all of his grand visions.” (Eleventh Metal, page 164).

Beginning in Eleventh Metal, Kelsier forms his plan that we see enacted in The Final Empire. Specifically, this line. “Nobody fights, he thought, Nobody thinks they can fight. But they’re wrong. We can fight…I can fight.” (Eleventh Metal, page 165). “A plan began to bud, a plan he barely dared consider for its audacity. Vengeance. And more.” (Eleventh Metal, Page 169).

This plan carries us into the main narrative of The Final Empire. Every major event, barring a few hiccups, is fully orchestrated by Kelsier. He planned for the House War, long before he sat down with his friends and discussed it in Club’s Shop. The beginnings of it were at Trestings Plantation, where he “stirred up a little trouble.” (Prologue, page 12, TFE).

His death, at the end of the novel, was part of a plan; hidden deep under other sets of plans, a hidden leaf of paper among many: A plan to get the Skaa to rise up.

I doubt I need to fully list all of Kelsier’s planning and plotting throughout the books; it’s extensive and would fill several sheets of paper. While we can all agree that Kelsier is an impulsive man, I believe a suitable picture has been drawn up that proves that he doesn’t fit this particular criteria.

Irritability or Aggressiveness

“He’d been in street brawls before, but not many. He’d tried to avoid them-brawling had been an old habit of Dockson’s. For once, he wished he’d been less refined in that particular area.”

Kelsier’s anger throughout the first novel, and indeed Eleventh Metal, is mostly internal. In Eleventh Metal, he doesn’t lash out at Gemmel, despite the man deserving it. He instead focuses that anger on other, more deserving targets. Through most of the novel, he’s rather numb, incapable of any emotion, until he finds the Skaa, hanging up and nearly flayed from the experiments at Shezler’s hands. He murders Shezler brutally with a shard of glass punched to the throat. (Eleventh Metal, page 167). His actions with Hoid in the Well of Ascension could certainly be touted as aggressive, however I disagree with this line of thinking, for reasons I’ll outline in greater detail later in the essay. (Part 2, Chapter 1, page 231, SH)

“Kelsier kept smiling. He’d do so until it felt natural. Until that numbness, tied in a knot within him, started to unravel and he began to feel again. If that was possible.” (Eleventh Metal, page 149).

“…the only thing he could feel these days was rage, and that rage couldn’t guide him.”

Irritability generally means lashing out at those around you. Kelsier doesn’t do that. He gets his angriest towards “friends” in the caves, when manipulating Bilg to speak of his doubts. Diction is very important here. Kelsier wanted Bilg to die for speaking against him. (Something that was, unfortunately, very common in military groups in prior eras (of Earth). It was labeled as treason, and execution was the usual punishment.) “Kelsier paused. This man should die, he thought angrily. On the ground, Bilg groaned quiestly. Kelsier could just barely see his twisted arm, its bone shattered by the powerful strike. It was bleeding.   No, Kelsier thought. This is enough.” (Chapter 21, Page 351, TFE).

Note that, despite his anger and irritation, he changes his mind quickly. The heat of the moment, the trauma of being back in caverns similar to the ones he was tortured in, the looming threat of their deaths drawing ever closer, got the better of him, and he stoppered it.

Despite Vin disobeying him many, many times, following him, and contradicting him, Kelsier never snaps at her. When he catches her following him to Kredik Shaw, he sits down and speaks to her. Yet more evidence is seen in his speaking with his brother. Marsh gets angry; Marsh snaps; We can’t deny him this. Yet Kelsier, despite his inner monologue saying that Marsh is the only one that can get under his skin, keeps his relative cool.

““Oh?” Marsh asked, tapping the word atium on the board. “Why the games, Kelsier? Why lead Yeden along, pretending to accept him as your ‘employer’? Why act like you care about the skaa? We both know what you’re really after.”             Kelsier clenched his jaw, a bit of his humor melting away. He always could do that to me.””(Chapter 7, Page 130, TFE).

During Secret History, though technically before the events of Eleventh Metal and The Final Empire, Kelsier kills seven people in retribution for murdering a girl for spilling tea. He remembers this as he wanders into the town of Longsfollow. You could definitely argue aggression in this case. (Part 4, Chapter 2, page 282, SH).

Kelsier does not fit this criteria. Random acts of aggression spaced throughout a lifetime of traumatic events and death at every corner are to be expected, and throughout it all, he’s a wonderful man to those around him; supportive, charitable, and loyal.

Reckless Disregard for the Safety of Others

“The best practice is doing.” Vin said. “My brother trained me to steal by taking me on burglaries.” Kelsier shook his head. “It’s too dangerous.”

Kelsier is shown to care, deeply, for the safety of those surrounding him. We don’t see much of it in Eleventh Metal, but we can assume, based on him helping the Skaa get out of the city at the end of the novella, that he cared for their safety.

In TFE, he is constantly aware of not only his crew’s safety, but his army’s as well. They walk a very fine line; one that, if broken, would result in their immediate deaths. Multiple lines of safeguards and protections, of smoke and mirrors, goes into making sure there is no chance of betrayal or accidental mis-step. 

“...Renoux nodded. Ostensibly we’re sending this all via canal barges to my plantation in the west. However, the barges will stop to drop off supplies–and many of the canalmen–at the rebellion caverns. The barges and a few men will continue on to keep upon appearances.” “Our soldiers don’t even know that Renoux is in on the plan,” Kelsier said, smiling. “They think he’s a nobleman that I’m scamming.” (Chapter 20, page 329, TFE)

The security of his troops, and indeed, all of their heads as well, was paramount. The three guards at the entrances at all times, were stationed to keep everyone in that cavern safe from potential betrayal. After they find Marsh “dead”, Kelsier sends the entire crew to the bolt lair before leaving for the Pits of Hathsin. He also tells them to send for Renoux, to tell him to pull out. This happened after a night of thought; it wasn’t an impulsive act.

Upon the attack on Vin’s former crew…

“Should we move our base?” Ham asked. Kelsier slowly shook his head. “When Clubs came to this lair, he would have worn a disguise to and from the meeting, hiding his limp…We should still be safe. (Abridged, Page 208, 11)

Upon finding Vin tailing him as he observed Camon’s hanging…

“What are you doing here?” “I wanted to see what you were doing!” “This could have been dangerous! What were you thinking?” (Abridged, 211, chapter 11)

Upon Kelsier catching Vin tailing him, beginning a back and forth about Kredick Shaw, and Vin deciding she’ll tail him regardless of what he says, Kelsier reads her thoughts. “I’m serious, Vin! You can’t go with me.” “Why not?” she asked, abandoning pretense. “If what you’re doing is so dangerous, wouldn’t it be safer if you had another Mistborn watching your back?” “You still don’t know all of the metals,” Kelsier said. “Only because you haven’t taught me.” “You need more practice.” “The best practice is doing.” Vin said. “My brother trained me to steal by taking me on burglaries.” Kelsier shook his head. “It’s too dangerous.” (page 241, 13)

Upon Vin awakening from her coma the second time…

“Vin,” Kelsier said hesitantly. “I owe you an apology. I nearly got you killed.” Vin snorted quietly. “It’s not your fault. I made you take me.” “You shouldn’t have been able to make me,” Kelsier said. “My original decision to send you away was the right one. Please accept the apology.” (Page 268, Chapter 16, TFE).

“I don’t want to be responsible for something happening to you, Vin. Not again.” (page 287, Chapter 17, TFE).

  Are there instances where he disregards the safety of others? He doesn’t care for noblemen. He certainly doesn’t care much for the Ire, though they were trying to forcibly take his God. Many people may argue he doesn’t care for those on Roshar, but this has never been explicitly mentioned in the novels; we hear from players that are literal lightyears away from Kelsier, operating under his orders but without his oversight: they can bend rules and hurt people without being chastised.

 Kelsier does not fit this criteria, as the above examples clearly illustrate he cares deeply for the safety of those under his wing.

Consistent Irresponsibility (Inability to hold a job, etc)

“A successful crewleader needs to know how to divide labor, especially on a job as big as this one.”

Throughout the novels, Kelsier has shown consistent responsibility. Before the novels take place, we know he led a successful crew of thieves to the point of massive wealth and infamy. After the Pits, he takes the downfall of the Final Empire under his wing, organizing and spearheading the entire operation on largely his own dime and merit. (It was a multi-headed approach, yes; without Dockson, many things would not have gotten done as well as they had with him, but this just showcases Kelsier’s ability to organize work well.) If we’re getting into the more psychological definition of responsibility (the feeling of being responsible for a person, place, or thing(s) wellbeing) he takes responsibility for the entire planet in Secret History, going so far as to cheating final death, taking up a shard for safe keeping, and giving it up, all to keep his planet, and those he loves, from Ruin.

Leading the Ghostbloods is similar to him leading his crew, only on a far wider and grander scale.

As for him being consistently irresponsible, it’s safe to say he doesn’t fit this. There are a few times when he makes brash decisions that could be labeled as irresponsible, but they fit being impulsive better, which is a trait we know he has.

Lack of Remorse

“Kelsier stood up, turning his back toward the sight. For all his cleverness, he’d gone and broken the poor girl’s heart. I must be the smartest idiot around, Kelsier thought.”

Probably one of the most contentious topics in the fandom is Kelsier’s feelings towards the nobles he kills. Chapter 5 into the beginning of Chapter 7, we are confronted with how he feels towards the men he kills in pursuit of his goal.

It is very safe to say, he doesn’t feel remorse for these men. It’s explained as he descends from the roof, pushing two guards off the balcony to their deaths. He’s angry, he’s determined, and has no pity for those who hold up the Final Empire, especially if their skaa. He does, however, feel remorse for hurting those he cares about; those he wants to protect. The best example of this is Vin: he feels terrible when she’s nearly killed because of his stunt at Kredick Shaw, he feels bad for how he spoke to her before he died, and he’s stricken by his actions in “killing” Elend in an effort for her to keep the power.

“Vin,” Kelsier said hesitantly. “I owe you an apology. I nearly got you killed.” Vin snorted quietly. “It’s not your fault. I made you take me.” “You shouldn’t have been able to make me.” (Chapter 16, page 267, TFE).

Note the actions at the beginning of this scene: “Kelsier was there when she awoke. He sat on the stool by her bed, hands clasped with his elbows on his knees, watching her by the faint light of a lantern.” (Chapter 16, page 267, TFE) Based on Sanderson’s word choice, it is safe to say he’s been watching her for hours, agonized. This is further cemented by a later observation by Vin. “What did one make of a world where a crewleader agonized over his people?” (Chapter 16, page 269, TFE).

He’s also broken up by how he spoke to the army, leading Yeden to “test” the army by striking against a nearby garrison. The entirety of page 419 showcases Kelsier’s thoughts and emotions about this, but I’ll break it up.

“He sat with hands clasped before him…” Remember when he was watching Vin? Similar behavior. “Kelsier shook his head. So many dead. They’d gathered nearly seven thousand troops before this fiasco, but now most of them lay dead. Yeden had apparently decided to “test” the army by striking at night against the Holstep Garrison. What had led him to such a foolish decision?” “Me, Kelsier thought. This is my fault. He’d promised them supernatural aid. He’d set himself up, had made Yeden a part of the crew, and had talked too casually about doing the impossible. Was it any wonder that Yeden had thought he could attack the Final Empire head on, considering the confidence Kelsier had given him? Was it any wonder the soldiers would go with the man, considering the promises Kelsier had made?” “Now the men were dead, and Kelsier was responsible…But, he couldn’t get over the twisting in his gut…the fact that they’d likely died expecting some sort of divine protection from Kelsier…that was disturbing.”

Kelsier fully feels the weight of hubris here, of the secret plan he’s been working on by himself the past few months, that we get a window into during his time in the caves. He feels terrible for what he caused, he fully understands that this was because of him. Safe to say, he feels remorse. You could say this is the comeuppance for his actions with Bilg.

 When witnessing the executions, Kelsier opens up about his remorse, as well.

 “I wish to the forgotten gods that those boys hadn’t died. Unfortunately, we can’t change that now—we can only use the opening they gave us.” (Chapter 26, page 439, TFE).

Kelsier does not want remorse; he’s full of it. He knows when to put it aside, however, and not let it flood him. Kelsier does not fit this criteria. 

Deep Dives Specific scenes in Mistborn are contentious, especially with Kelsier. I have gotten into many arguments with people whom I feel miss the point of the books, and because they have a grudge on a character, fail to see things from their perspective. Therefore, I’m going to go into these specific scenes, break them down, and lay them flat. Imagine it’s a UV Map of a 3D model; all little edges exposed so we can get a good look!

Kelsier and Bilg: Chapter 20 of TFE

Kelsier’s manipulation of Bilg is a key point in the evidence FOR him to be a psychopath, and I want to point out that while Kelsier had very good reasons for doing what he did, I am by no means saying he was moral in doing it. With that out of the way, let’s discuss WHY Kelsier manipulated Bilg into doing what he did, and the emotions that brought him to this point.

It’s not explained outwardly in the text, but Kelsier has some pretty major PTSD surrounding his time in the pits. He pauses before entering the crack, and uses this moment to impress the men; but inwardly he’s not enjoying having to enter this thin crack in the earth and delve into darkness. We get to hear his inner thoughts, but to all others, he’s putting on an act of confidence and bravado. (Pages 346, 347, 352, 353 of Chapter 21, TFE).

During the first tour of the caves, Kelsier is thinking of Mare, her betrayal, and it gets to be so much he asks Hammond to tell him “what he’s thinking about.” Hammond proceeds to ask him a question that seriously disturbs him.

The question, which was if Skaa are meant to be ruled over by the nobility, stayed with him the rest of the week, along with his darkened mood. He realizes, as he’s eating the feast at the end of his visit, that the skaa don’t really believe they can succeed. They need a symbol, a sign, and Kelsier decides to use himself as that symbol.

The reason he chose Bilg and his friends at the table was to scapegoat them into taking the proverbial L for the army. It was all to use his allomancy to empower Demoux and show them they can and will overpower the Final Empire. The reason BIlg had to die was the keep up appearances; those who question their commanding officers were executed. You can argue we don’t know enough about how a militia is ran in the Final Empire, or that it’s nothing like Earth’s military, but as it’s written by an Earth bound man with Earth bound references, I believe it’s a safe thing to assume. Kelsier, whom we’ve already discussed is an impulsive man, got caught up in the moment: his anger from the week spent cooped up in a cave that reminded of hell overcame him. He truly wanted Bilg to die in that moment. He superseded this thought process, reigned himself in, and let him live.

The morality of his actions here can be discussed, and no, it wasn’t ok to manipulate Bilg and Co’s emotions like that. It wasn’t ok to use them as a scapegoat. But I can sure see how it was necessary for a single man to be sacrificed in order to bolster several thousand.

Hoid in the Well: Secret History

When it comes to this scene, I won’t argue that Kelsier was being extra here. The man has been cooped up in a 5x5 spot for a long time, with no answers and seriously questioning his logic at becoming what he’s become. His only companion is an insane, unraveling god who barely speaks most times he “visits.” So when an actual man comes by, floating on what looks to be a corpse, Kelsier is immediately on edge.

All quotes are taken from pages 228 – 233, of Part 2, Chapter 1, of Secret History.

“ “Who are you?” Kelsier asked, stepping to the edge of his prison, eyes narrowed. “A spirit?” “Alas,” the man said, “death has never really suited me. Bad for the complexion, you see.” He studied Kelsier, lips raised in a knowing smile. Kelsier hated him immediately.” “

Seen from Kelsier’s perspective, this is a man that knows things and is holding back. This is a schemeing, conniving man, that is similar to the nobles he’s dealt with all his life. It doesn’t help that Hoid and Kelsier have similar personalities. Note Hoid’s words, “bad for the complexion.” A similar line is used by Kelsier at the very beginning of TFE. 

“Fieldwork hasn’t ever really suited me.” Kelsier said. “It’s far too hard on my delicate skin.” (Prologue, page 6, TFE).

“Got stuck there, did you?” the man said. “In Ati’s prison…” He clicked his tongue. “Fitting recompense, for what you did. Poetic, even.” “What I did?” “Destroying the Pits, O Scarred one. That was the only perpendicularity on this planet with any reasonable ease of access.” Kelsier has no idea what a perpendicularity is. Yes, he destroyed it. Did he know what he was doing on a grand scale? No. He was, to his knowledge, destroying the Empire’s main economic driver. Hoid treats him like a criminal when Kelsier was fighting against an unjust Empire, one that Hoid is very familiar with, having been to Scadrial before. Calling him names doesn’t help.

“Who are you?” Kelsier said. “I?” The man said. “I am a driver. A miscreant. The flame’s last breath, made of smoke at it’s passing.” “That’s…needlessly obtuse.” Well said, Kelsier. Hoid plays games, this we know from dealing with him in Stormlight. However, with Kaladin and Shallan he gives half answers, or none at all, in a playful, non-demeaning way. Here he’s laden with vitriol and spite, for no good reason. It gets worse.

“And you claim to not be dead?” “If I were, would I need this?” the Driver said, knocking his oar against the front of his small loglike vessel. [Kelsier notices Spanky for the first time, not knowing what a cognitive shadow just is yet.] “A corpse,” he whispered. “Oh Spanky here is just a spirit. It’s damnably difficult to get about in this subastral—anyone physical risks slipping through these mists and falling, perhaps forever. So many thoughts pool together here, becoming what you see around, and you need something finer to travel over it all.” “That’s horrible.” “Says the man who built a revolution on the backs of the dead. At least I only need one corpse.” Hoid is being ridiculous here. Yes, Spanky is a cognitive shadow, but as I’ve stated, Kelsier has no idea what that is. To his knowledge, this man is riding a corpse around. Hoid is also forgetting that the people Kelsier murdered were far less than innocent; Kelsier can make distinctions here. A rapist and murderer who regularly abuses his peasants is different from a corpse used to wade down a lake of thoughts.

Kelsier folded his arms. This man was wary—thought he spoke lightheartedly, he watched Kelsier with care, and held back as if contemplating a method of attack.

Note the diction here; Kelsier is reading Hoid’s body language as he should; Hoid is planning to use the well to gain purchase in the spiritual realm and take that bead of Lerasium. He isn’t planning anything wrong per se, but Kelsier has no way of knowing that. All Kelsier sees is a man preparing to attack.

“He wants something, Kelsier guessed. Something that I have, maybe? No, he seemed legitimately surprised that Kelsier was there. He had come here, intending to visit the Well. Perhaps he wanted to enter it, access the power? Or did he, perhaps, just want to have a look at the thing Beyond?”

Wrong guesses, but good ones all the same for an ignorant man. Hoid does want something. So far, Kelsier’s waryness is completely justified. He tries to be polite, asking a simple question. “Well, you’re obviously resourceful,” Kelsier said. “Perhaps you can help me with my predicament.” “Alas,” The Driver said. “Your case is hopeless.” Kelsier felt his heart sink. “Yes, nothing to be done,” the Driver continued. “You are, indeed, stuck with that face. By manifesting those same features on this side, you show that even your soul is resigned to you always looking like one ugly sonofa—" “Bastard!” Kelsier cut in. “You had me for a second.”

Instead of even offering Kelsier a crumb of help, he instead insults him, for…very little reason. Hoid rarely kicks people when they’re down; he instead punches up. We notice this with the Rosharan nobility. He doesn’t insult the peasant waitstaff. Why is he insulting Kelsier? There is no reason to do so; he’s just being an ass to be an ass. Kelsier hasn’t even mouthed off yet.

So far Hoid has treated him like an inferior, insulted him and been “needlessly” obtuse, all while showing suspicious body language. Is it any wonder Kelsier is on edge and ready to defend the Well? He knows it’s for Vin; he means to protect it until she can have it.

The two go back and forth for some time, speaking of Kelsier’s bastard nature, skaa versus nobility, and Hoid applying some (I believe it to be dor, but I’m not sure) glowing stuff to his oar. (in an effort to prevent it from de-manifesting). As they speak, Hoid edges closer to the well. Kelsier has been watching him this entire time.

He begins to ask a question again, despite Hoid’s rudeness. “Is there a way to escape this prison?” Kelsier asked. “How about this?” the Drifter said. “We’ll have an insult battle. Winner gets to ask one question, and the other has to answer truthfull. I’ll start. What’s wet, ugly, and has scars on it’s arms?” Another insult to an innocent question, and now Kelsier is very on edge. He’s obviously deflecting. So Kelsier decides to be as extra as possible in an effort to scare him away. Now, a cognitive shadow would, realistically, be as scary as an earthworm to Hoid if it’s not on Threnody, but Kelsier doesn’t know this. Which is why he brings out his “I’m-going-to-murder-you” routine that goes into lurid detail and leaves Hoid speechless. Kelsier even throws in a shrug.

Hoid then dives for the well, and Kelsier grabs him, determined to disable him, kill him, or just prevent him from doing whatever he wants to do in the well. Which leads to their fight, where Kelsier does zero damage to Hoid and Hoid proceeds to torture him incessantly as a “lesson.” He did not need to go as far as he did. If Hoid had been truthful with who he was, what he was after, and perhaps offered explanations, Kelsier would have been less inclined to act rashly. Instead, Hoid is needlessly obtuse, rude, mocking, condescending and tortures him.

It makes his words at the end of RoW amusing to me, as Hoid cheats in this fight and was the aggressor in every definition of the word. Hoid strikes first by the very fact he jumped for the Well. Kelsier was merely defending it.

“Deal with your own stupid planet, you idiot. Don’t make me come there and slap you around again.” (Chapter 115, page 1238, RoW).

To tie this long, rambling, and somewhat insane essay up, Kelsier is not a psychopath. He fits only one of the criteria, and only somewhat fits another. Since one needs to fit three of the traits in order to be diagnosed, the man is free from ASPD. Through the essay, I have showcased his empathy, his understanding, his patience, his trust, and his love of those around him. Hell, he says as much in Secret History when wandering, his soul cracking from loneliness. He’s a flawed man; he can be arrogant, egotistical, and impulsive, but he wants what is best for his people. No one can deny that.

[tonydaddingham]

clearing out the drafts of Random Things I've Noticed if you can't tell but here, have another one - this building on the end of aziraphale's row of shops, on the other side of the record shop:

now im fairly certain about two things. first, it's called 'Alf Laylah wa-Laylah' - translated to english from arabic as One Thousand and One Nights. i can't quite tell at this quality if the writing below it is hebrew or yiddish, nor if it's a translation of the text above it (although, as best as i can tell? it isn't? but not sure)

im also not entirely sure on the relevance of the reference - if there is any to be had - to the story compilation that is One Thousand and One Nights, to tell the truth. the immediate thought that springs to mind is how scheherazade tells the king countless folk tales and stories over 1001 nights in order to keep him in suspense of hearing how the stories end - so he essentially stops killing women as revenge for the infidelity of his wife (it's a whole thing), whom he eventually pardons/spares from execution.

all the tales - as well as returns to the 'present' - include debate on philosophies and ethics, and explore various themes and topics, but regardless... my thoughts are somewhat jumping between this, the questions around the reliability of events as presented in s2, the flashbacks and the Lessons, etc. maybe that's not the link to make here, but it's all im coming up with so far.

but back to the building, and the second thing: think that the stars on the bottom half of the building, in the specific configuration they're shown, are the kaheksakand (estonian) / auseklis (latvian) - an eight-pointed star representing fertility and life, the triumph of light over darkness, as well as used as a protection symbol against evil (aptly placed outside the door).

there's a lot to go into re: the symbology behind '8', including its relationship to the concept of balance and harmony, especially in nature. the eight-pointed star in general, not just in the above exact shape, has dozens of cultural, religious, and mythological links (tbh it's probably featured in some capacity in nearly every culture), but i think particularly apt is how it links to venus aka. the morning star.

in the interest of keeping this brief (im sure cleverer people may wish to clarify/develop this more!!!), and keeping on track with where its place may sit in the show, i think it's first of all potentially of interest how this building is lit, given the above. we see the shot of the bentley arriving to whickber street in ep1 at night, and this particular shop (?) front is the most brightly lit... might mean nothing, might mean something:

but when the demons descend in ep5, a good portion of them appear out of the mist from that direction; a green mist (green shop?), reflecting the hell vibes we saw in ep1 etc. that being said, when crowley starts sensing Trouble Is Afoot earlier on, he's looking in all directions and certainly we see some demons behind him (in the direction of the dirty donkey) when he confronts this particular little gang of them, so unless some demons started arriving ahead of schedule, they may not have all come through this building:

but. we know from eric that the lift is broken, and the only other routes are the small lift, one at a time, or the stairs. shax obviously arrives in style, but the other demons? taken the stairs. what if this front is that exit onto earth? but just the back stairwell?

there's so many potentially loose threads to weave in here, and im sure i'll come back to this at some point, but felt it was an interesting design choice nonetheless, even if it ultimately means naff all✨

[rachell-redacted]

Here's my review of The Talos Principle 2. It's not a flattering one, but it felt like some things needed to be said.

First of all, let’s get all of ad hominems out the way. This is not a review in bad faith, nor is in written out of malice. I’m not politically opposed to democracy, liberalism, individualism, humanism and women’s rights. I’m somewhat a nihilist, yeah, but a rather practical one. Meanings can be constructed for ease of living and efficiency and all that jazz. I’m also not a puzzle genre hater. I’ve 100%ed Portal 2, and the only reason I do not have 100% at TTP1 is because I could never bring myself to kill Milton off. Who I am though is a huge fan of the first game. This is clearly affecting my perception of this one, so this is relevant, I think.

I’m a huge fan of TTP1 and I hugely disliked TTP2. Is this game a sequel, does it continue the story? Yes. Is it a spiritual successor, does it continue the _narrative_? No, not at all. It feels different, hits different, and for me it wasn’t in a good kind of way.

First of all, TTP2 is overwhelmingly naïve. I do see that this is a deliberate creative choice, but I strongly believe it does not fit the series. It was a bad idea to take a thought-provoking piece of art and continue it as a message rather than as a discussion. TTP1 had space within itself to engage with its ideas and to form individual conclusions. TTP2 clearly wants to tell you something specific, but to truly listen you need to suspend your disbelief a lot more than before. Where the first game would have tackled a question with some degree of nuance, this one tends to postulate an answer. Would like to explore space for some other reasons than our moral duty to light up the Universe with cognition and life? Do not believe in such things? Good luck. Do not think that beauty exists / is inherently good / matters? Good luck once again, now with a chance to disappoint your companions. The list goes on, and while I’m all for humanism, technocracy and progress, I still felt trapped in reasonings game offered me for it all.

There’s also a huge problem with the narrative as a whole – there is no whole. Plot seems strangely fragmented, with Somnodrome arc being a bitter mix of an afterthought and a cut plotline. What was it for? Same goes for the secret society plot. And the main story, including Miranda, is just flat. Writers want us to care for their characters, but with characters being mouthpieces for ideas this is rather hard.

Also, there’s a Theory of Everything is this game. It just is. With it, the Universe is _postulated_ as being fundamentally knowable and understandable, which is unsettling for such a huge philosophical debate. (Put your ad hominem down, I do believe that the world is cognizable, I just don’t think making this a knowable fact is a good choice for this particular game). Moreover, with the Theory of Everything the science is solved. By one person, who consciously excluded their peers out of scientific progress. One person solved science and nowhere in the game is anyone upset about it. Why? Because writers needed a magical solve-all-problems device, and without it nothing would work plot wise. But with it the plot just seems plastic and cheap.

This story has no room for me to challenge it from the inside, it forces me to go and start a one-sided conversation with its authors, which I do not like. In short, it feels rushed, naïve and incomplete. But this is a puzzle game, not a text adventure. So, are the puzzles any good?

Well, I did not like them. I’m not sure if it means that they are bad, but in my opinion, they are somewhat boring. Most of the time solving them feels mechanical, not that much of ah-a! moments for me. More of the “finally, get this, stupid new puzzle element” and “after 500 hours in portal my brain solves this without thinking”. The other category is “to convoluted to be interesting”. But there’s non zero chance this is me and not the game.

Really bad stuff happens between the puzzles, in those huge open spaces. They get old very fast, and fast travel option isn’t helping much. Some regions are almost impossible to navigate even with the compass, and solving for stars just becomes a chore.

Well, most of the game felt like a chore to me. There are other things I’m upset about, like making Athena, seemingly our main character from TTP1, a chosen-one with a God complex (she IS that even without the myth around her) or not including Milton, but otherwise good plot could have made it work. This one did not. It disregards a very personal thing for a fan of the first game – their unique experience. Maybe the new audience will find this alluring. I certainly did not.

[vro0m]

"Clearly you're very annoyed that I don't think Max is completely right, but I'm not interested in debating you on that, so I'm just not gonna do it. (...) I again am not talking about whether he gets punished by the stewards because of course he gets penalties I'm talking about whether his entourage including his team act like "well it is what it is the stewards made a decision" or "he was right and they were wrong and our driver can't do no mistakes and nothing bad" which, historically, they have done."

? Thats not has been said, nor the type of narrative you and other accounts have been feeding regarding Max and his driving. I dont think Max was completely right, for the record. (Not that it matters) He only hurt himself by the choices he made in the fight with Lewis. He was clumsy and frustrated although not in a vacuum. Of course, as a fan, I'm going to be sympathetic of the context that led to his error. I'm not asking u to do the same, ur obviously not a fan. In Austria its a different story, he raced how he was being raced and was fully within his rights to do so. If his team, his "entourage", along with multiple other drivers on the grid, Alain Prost, Eddie Jordan, etc btw, also agree with how he raced, I'm not sure why you thinking it would be "beneficial" for him to change is any way relevant to the discussion. (You, and other accounts like yours, that claim objectivity above all else, asked for a drive through penalty for Austria, on top of the penalties he received. Hungary was considered a racing incident, with Hamilton being noted as the who should have made a better effort to avoid collision. No penalty.. Is this, to u, an example of stewarding favoring Max and rewarding his style of driving?) You've made implicit and explicit references to Max being treated more leniently than others by FIA, and not learning from what you consider to be subpar driving, which ends up hurting him. This is your opinion. This is not based on any data, its just an eye test for Verstappen and what you think is good or bad for f1. This whole time I've been asking you for recent specific instances where max was penalized according to a more lenient rule book that only benefits him and is detrimental to others. I'm also asking you why veteran champions like Max and Lewis have different reactions from you and the public when it comes to what they demand from their teams and what they can or cannot say when those demands aren't met. I also get how this can be boring and uninteresting to you. I dont have any issue or beef with u specifically lol I just saw your posts and wanted to challenge some notions. Thats it. Feel free not to interact anymore.

Yeah see you're talking of "other blogs like me" who supposedly share my opinions but I think you're mistaken about what my opinions are. You seem to have wrongly associated me with other takes you've seen elsewhere that do not come from me and that's why we're both confused in this convo.

Because what you've just said is not what has been said is actually exactly what I've been saying lol

I did not ask for a drive through in Austria? I did not say he should have received a penalty yesterday? Like I've told you before I'm not saying the stewards are favouring him. I also did not say his driving his subpar. I think he's an excellent driver and have repeatedly said so.

Like legit you're misattributing things you've read elsewhere to me. You're generalising based on a stereotype you have in your mind of "blogs like mine" but I am not who you think I am and you are being kinda weird about it to be completely honest.

My point was, I think Max sometimes is rash (like you said he got frustrated and it led him to be clumsy yesterday) and I think that the fact that he's historically not been held accountable for his rash behavior by his team and entourage (NOT talking about the stewards) is not good for him because he would get even better if they didn't see him making contacts with others as just fine. He would have to learn to control his emotions better and not get clumsy like that when he's frustrated (which is a normal thing to happen, but getting clumsy because of it is a pity), and that would make him not less bold but smarter about it, and I would like to see that happen because I like good racing and he's a good racer.

[geminoir]

The amount of Kamala Harris election content or adjacent I see flooding the web by supposedly nuanced, critically thinking non-conservatives that will not even mention the outright terror of the reality that the US and Israel is imposing on the middle east……..tells you exactly what needs to be known about so called “progressives”. Like, not a single mention. Not even an allusion. Imagine in WW2 talking about like, the economy, or whatever, and refusing to make your politics about, Idk, that pesky nazi problem overseas as if it’s unconnected or not relevant to your home turf. That would be weird, would it not? And this bullshit is like, all over Substack, too, wrapped up in the kind of wording that makes you go ‘oh finally politics being talked about in a way that’s digestible and not for the Maga crowd - very liberal’ — but what does it talk about? Everything but what matters. That just gets swept under the rug, hoping you won’t notice, not wanting to dim the feeling of finally not being embarrassed by the Democratic nominee. And the shit is promoted, too. I know there’s people on there that do talk about the implications of the siege on Palestine and more, on the platform too. Not small creators neither. It’s a choice. It leaves the worst taste in my mouth. Anyway, I make this to say, you might think this is par for the course, so why even bring it up? Shift the focus to those who are talking about it. (And definitely, yes - go follow Threadings on substack right away). But what isn’t called out, doesn’t change. I want to shame these people and their head-in-the-sand scummy backbone-less-ness. More shame. They think the majority of the voter base will not decide based off whether they continue to arm Israel and demolish millions of lives and whole cultures and histories overseas (because it’s largely brown people, it’s Arab people, it’s Muslims - murder away, human rights who?), and all the people falling over themselves for Kamala in these debates and how the DNC finally felt like something to be proud of - that’s how Israel was able to go from flattening Gaza to moving on to flattening Lebanon and so on. If we haven’t learned from history - neither appeasement nor ignorance works against a monstrous entity set on genocide. This is how zionism marches on.

[ex-foster]

What's wild to me about pro-choicers using foster kids in the abortion debate is that they acknowledge that foster kids have it pretty bad.

There is the issue of homelessness when they age out of the system. There is a significant risk for abuse in care. There is also sex trafficking (the majority of sex trafficking victims have history in foster care).

These pro-choicers also claim to be feminists. So 1+1=2. Some people might think that these feminists might be interested in pioneering a form of activism for girls that aged out of foster care because they are a vulnerable population.

And yet what do we actually get? Pro-choicers EXCLUSIVELY mentioning us in the abortion debate. They are not interested in being helpful. They don't care and they aren't ashamed of it. If you call them out on it and tell them that using foster kids in the abortion debate is stigmatizing and if you also note that these pro-choicers exclusively mention foster kids in the abortion debate - they get quite nasty. Not sure if you've ever noticed that. They get quite abusive.

Still thinking about that pro-choice mod that kicked me from the abortion debate subreddit. My crime? Asking someone who didn't see anything wrong with foster kids being exclusively brought up in the abortion debate if their employer would like to hear them say that.

I was accused of "doxxing" the person by the pro-choice mod. I did not doxx them. I asked them a theoretical question about whether it is appropriate to talk about foster kids in this manner. The relevance of course is the fact that so many professions have interactions with foster kids. Every single mandated reporter interacts with foster kids: social workers, police, paramedics, nurses, doctors, teachers, therapists, and so on. This stigma for foster children is nor harmless! It is a huge concern for grown adults who may be working in these professions and interacting with these vulnerable populations while simultaneously having such contempt for them.

If YOU are going to bring up foster kids in the abortion debate, we should at the very least be allowed to have an opinion on it. Getting absolutely dogpiled by liberals and banned is not making you look any better.

I'm starting to think that liberals have a very serious prejudice against foster kids and even the topic of advocating for foster kids seems taboo to them. Unspeakable, unthinkable. The only thing they seem capable of achieving is having an abusive attitude towards us.

I am for grassroots efforts to make things better for former foster kids. I don't understand why there aren't more of us fighting. It seems like so many are completely demoralized.

[leportraitducadavre]

I wasn’t sure about posting this, as it’s an explanation I don’t think is required or mandatory of me to make but I feel like giving, this wasn’t prompted by any recent exchange nor ask, so please don’t think I’m speaking about someone specifically, as I’ve had this post in the drafts for a while; I just think it’s time to post it here to have a precedent in case a similar situation should occur.

[Warning: I’m using the singular person "you" to explain actions taken by people over the course of my time on Tumblr. It is not aimed at any specific person or the reader in particular.]

As you might know, I’m a human being -and as such, I make mistakes or have opinions that some people might disagree on. I think I’m mature enough to own up to them or even challenge my views. I know that my personality isn’t for everyone -I do think I’m mostly approachable, but I understand those that choose not to interact with me under those premises.

In that sense, if you only care about my “analyzer persona” (for lack of a better word) which is a totally valid take, then feel free to ignore this post as I’m now allowing myself to speak about my personal boundaries and my zone of comfort.

I have no problem with people disagreeing with me or commenting on my posts. I’ve posted them on a site where discussions and debates are the usual norm and I accepted the rules of the game, I know what I’m getting into when clicking on the “post” button. That being said, I can’t and won’t condone unpoliteness. I usually give people the benefit of the doubt as you see, people’s speeches can come off with a harsher tone than was intended when in writing; but if you have specifically reproduced more than once such conduct or mannerisms when trying to interact with me, then I’m blocking you.

You can’t reply to a post of mine to argue with it and, once I reply, simply cut the conversation short; you’re the one who initiated the debate in the first place, why are you shutting down the door you opened simply because my response didn’t validate your point of view? If you want to have the last word, then maybe express it in a space that allows you to take control of the narrative (as, your own blog).

Demanding me to give you (and the narrative in itself) a plausible solution for a character’s conundrum is never the point of my posts nor my job as a reader/analyzer; I have to perform twice the job because you either deny there’s a problem in the first place or can’t concoct a better political system. You can’t justify a character’s actions by asking the critics to “give me a solution then!”, because that’s not how story-framing works, as I was analyzing what actually happened in the story. Demanding such a thing is either justifying the narrative because “I would’ve reacted the same way!” (which is nothing but self-projection) or denying it of any value because “I wouldn’t have reacted that way!” (which is, again, self-projection). A character took a decision and I analyzed its reasoning; it’s not my job to search for a solution (and likely fail to give a plausible and/or bulleproof solution, as that was actually what many of you are actually looking for to undermine my analysis) in order to make a character look “less” evil because they had no other choice. The options were doing it or not doing it -each of them has different implications and consequences. We only saw and have canon evidence of what happened when they took one of the two; I make posts about that specific situation.

In addition, I consider extremely distasteful those who send you to Google the concepts that they consider relevant for their point of view, if they believe them to be that detrimental to their theory, then they should make sure everyone participating has the same notion they're handling. Otherwise, it's like they want to dismiss your case because you're "making no effort" to understand them because, you see, it’s my job to build their own arguments.

Finally, I don’t like to indulge in headcanons and “what if” scenarios, I have no problem with them but I don’t see the point in exploring them as much as some people ask me to. For instance, since I’m a Sasuke-centered blog mostly, if what you want is to take away Sasuke from the overall structure to give him a "good story", then you’re destroying him whole. Sasuke works as well as he does because he’s the complete opposite of the setting he's thrown inside of. Take away Sasuke and the plot doesn't work. Take away the shinobi system and Sasuke ceases to exist. Sasuke exists as an opposition, if he suddenly has nothing to oppose, then he’s done. Is the ending shit? Yes. Is the ending realistic? Also yes, heartbreaking, but realistic, as winning against the oppressive system is close to impossible. Naruto’s ending wants to give a very idealistic conclusion to a story that will never end in such a way, revolutions and structural changes don’t happen by talking, and Boruto came in to actually prove this when it showed us how Naruto fixed nothing.

[starrywangxian]

warning: the last of us spoilers!! (episode 9 in particular)

to the new people who are adding to the moral dilemma debate at the end of tlou from the show, first of all: hello! second of all, you're missing some points about the importance of the sciencists' dumbassery and joel's ain't no one touching my daughter rampage and hopefully i'll explain what those missing points are.

1. the cure wouldn't have worked.

you're very right, cures are impossible for fungal infections such as Cordyceps, however the key missing detail is joel didn't know that. joel is not a scientist nor did he know how the fireflies were going to make this cure. as much as i love the "we're all fucked" segment in the first episode and the scared scientist from episode 2, none of this context happens in the game so, it's not general knowledge that fungal infections cannot be treated let alone cured. it's a good point but it's not relevant to joel's moral dilemma because he doesn't know that the cure wouldn't work. when he's in his rampage, he's not thinking "silly, fireflies. this cure won't work! you can't cure fungal infections" because if he did, i'm sure he'd at least try to tell them first. and anyway, FEDRA really don't want to tell people that there is a way to cure this infection and then not do it. more people would join the fireflies that way and the QZs would quickly become under new management. so FEDRA are certainly not telling people that fungal infections cannot be cured (heck, FEDRA aren't even telling people about the different infected - ellie didn't know what a clicker was, pre-museum).

2. the scientists dropped out of med school.

yeah, they probably did because med school, as we know it today, hasn't existed for 20 years. doctors are most likely taught in the QZs - the place the Fireflies are currently bombing - and these courses are probably taught by FEDRA or at least the government, which are the people that are killing the fireflies by the masses. even if the fireflies running the tests and doing the operation on ellie did go to FEDRA med school, they most likely were not taught how to do precise biopsies or extraction surgeries as in an apocalypse, they probably want to train their doctors to do more practical operations and ones they're most likely to come across, or maybe they just forgot! it's been 20 years! plus the fireflies aren't exactly in the best place right now (FEDRA are doing a good job of killing them all), so they're probably too desperate to go through it thoroughly. so are these firefly scientists good scientists? no. but they're trying their best with the resources and expertise they have and most importantly, the exact procedure that ellie goes through does not matter.

ik it's a pain that there's a few holes and flaws with the plot but these little bits really don't have that big an impact and if these little details were accounted for then the impact on joel's decision wouldn't be as big as the writers wanted it to be.

the moral dilemma joel faces has to be a big deal: we spend all this time travelling across the country for this cure, just for one man to murder everyone in his path for his newfound daughter. that's the point here! the writers want us to think about sarah; joel didn't get a choice with sarah, she was taken from him but this time, he can save her. he has a choice and he'll do whatever it takes to make this time different. in those moments when he guns down everyone he sees, he's not seeing them as people with loved ones and hobbies; they're obstacles, they're threats to his ellie's safety. (think "you'd just come after her").

he doesn't care about these people, he only cares about ellie. joel did save the world that day, it's just that his world was that little girl. honestly, a lot of joel's reasoning is explained in part 2 of the game so if you're really hung up on it, give it a play (or wait until season 2).

my point being here is, the writers wanted to create a situation that 1) reminds us of sarah, and 2) makes ellie and joel's relationship very tense afterwards. because ellie knows that joel is lying about the fireflies and this creates a big rift in their relationship. the choice joel made has to be big to have this same impact. ellie is willing to sacrifice herself for a cure, even if it doesn't work because she already believes that she's getting more than she deserves. she should've died with riley that day, and then with tess, sam and henry. all these people she's seen die should have been her all those months ago. but joel can't let that happen, he can't let another daughter die. and boom the tension flowers! this moral dilemma is showing us how deep joel's feelings go; he'd kill half of salt lake city and doom all of humanity to death for his little girl, even if that means going against what she wants.

so to summarise, no one knows that the fungal infection cannot be cured, the little details that you're hung up on about the science do not matter and the writers needed to create this big moral dilemma to really test the love that joel feels for ellie.

*breathes* so any questions?

[nyaagolor]

First up- I LOVE your analysis and lore and everything, and as the number one Geeta lover you are literally one of the only people who I would see write "Geeta team edit" and actually keep reading. Most of these are done in such bad faith, so thank you for just not. I DO however have a few thoughts.

I think Espathra as a lead is actually really good. The opportunist ability stops players from boosting at the start of the battle, lumina crash is an absolute menace, and espathra's association with being beautiful and viscous I think really fits the overall theme of Geeta and her team. I would love to see espathra running stored power, but that's a nitpick.

Armarouge/ceruledge are absolutely amazing picks and definitely should have been on the team, 100% agree. I think ceruledge would again fit her overall look and theme better.

Gholdengo...like I fully get what your saying about it being rare to find and a good choice in that sense, but I really think champion teams should show off their personality first and foremost. And gholdengo is so gotdamn silly, I just can't see it working with her team/vibe.

I actually really like gogoat tbh. Ik it's not a Paldean Mon but idk the rest of the team around it just really pulls it in thematically. Theres not a lot of reasoning here I just like it lmao. Same with veluza tbh, although again I think this one fits her theme really well. Also I despise rabsca. Personal opinion on that one lmao

10000000% agree about putting glimmora with Geeta in the same way as Nemona and pawmot, absolutely! And also making glimmora way harder to find in game, yes! I admit I did like finding out about the connection between Geeta and area zero after the fact, purely because it keeps Geeta relevant in the post game lmao. It's just nice to have her continue to be mentioned even while off screen and in theory done story-wise. I will say that glimmora can hit like a special truck, and I personally love using it as an ace/sweeper, but again thats my preference. I find it's actually kinda wasted potential using it for just set up. The ability is honestly more of a nice bonus than something to hinge the whole strat on.

That's all! Again, love your analysis sososo much! I just read it and got thoughts and wanted to share because I am constantly rotating Geeta and her team in my mind. And also like. The aesthetic and the theme are sooooo important

hiii thank u!! Talking about Geeta in any capacity is a goddamn nightmare bc there's like a 50% chance that if you don't have a giant blocklist someone is gonna come into ur notifs like "well um Actually" about something. We in the trenches out here. Anyway

Espathra: So a few people have pointed out that Espathra fits her really well either as an lead or just for the vibes and after thinking about it I'm inclined to agree. I didn't include it at first because it's Tulip's Paldea ace and I hate repeats but tbh? Tulip can find another psychic type. Geeta gets the bird now. Maybe that's why Tulip hates her so much

Celruedge: So I uh. Actually made a slight mistake in my original post. I meant to update it so she always has a Celruedge bc Mela has an Amarogue and then forgot to update the post before it posted so. Oops! Anyway yeah agreed Celruedge is cooler for this

Gholdengo: Imma be real with you I hate this thing. I included it on her team because no one else uses it and it would be a fun surprise but also I hate it. It doesn't fit her vibes whatsoever and I just wanna know Why it looks like that. A debateably necessary evil

The only reason Gogoat isn't in this team is bc I made a rule that they had to be exclusively Paldean pokemon. I am her Gogoat's number one fan I am ride or die for that thing. Giving him a little kiss on the forehead. I'm a Geeta's Gogoat apologist

I don't know anything about comp but I have friends that do and they mentioned Glimmora being her ace would require a lot of teambuilding around it which I don't know how to do nor do I want to. Lead or ace or whatever-- it's her little guy

Thanks for the ask!!

[struggling-burnout-perfectionist]

Dreamer

You ask about the nature of the glass:

Is it half-empty

Or is it half-full?

What’s your take on this age-old debate?

Be warned, however, the outcome is clear

And your personality so dear

Is not yours to judge:

Half-empty and you fail to see opportunities dimly outlined in hope;

Half-full and you wait for life to replenish possibilities that might never spring up.

You talk of a light at the end of the tunnel,

Which you introduce as being either salvation

Or being death, being another train with lamps all too bright.

Which do you see?

What is your interpretation?

Your choice, whichever it is, decides your fate

And your outlook in life.

No pressure, none of that, but choose wisely

Whether you would risk heavy delusion or morbid extremes.

You ask about the state of mind,

Are you an optimist

Or a pessimist?

Are you shrouded in hopes or blanketed in doubts?

Be warned, of course, your choice

Shall cause no-one to rejoice.

Be warned, of course, you can’t spoil the mood

Nor can you be delusional with your thoughts of grandeur.

I mean, you would probably tell me that I have to fit into one of the boxes,

Snuggle, however tightly, hugging my legs in a single category.

After all, it’s all black and white:

There is no grey.

Please remember that it’s either yes

Or it is no,

Without any hesitation nor any debates.

Do I see the glass half-empty

Or do I see it half-full?

I mean, that’s clearly the most pertinent question

Rather than asking whether it was being filled

Or whether it was being drunk,

As well as whether multiple people are thirsty,

Whether it is truly water in that cup

And the particular size of a portion or a drink.

Is the light the end of the tunnel

Or is it an upcoming train?

Don’t care about the context,

Why one would be in that tunnel,

Whether the light is moving

And if there’s the sound of an engine.

That’s not relevant, that’s not the question.

I am begging you, please tell me now,

Why do you care which of the two I am?

You say that I am a pessimist, that I have negative thinking patterns

And that I need to lighten up and not hold myself to such standards.

I say that my depression is significant but does not define my entire nature,

That my pessimism is a coping mechanism for the complexity of life.

You say, however interesting that sounds, I am still a pessimist at heart

And that it is a problem that could easily exacerbate

Into a realm of unknown that neither of us are prepared to seek.

I see your point, loud and clear,

Laughing and joking, I agree with your jeers.

Meanwhile my heart strenuously decides to continue beating,

Depleted of any such resistance to conflict.

Contemplating further, it is important to note that

I have big dreams, massive ambitions and thoughts I shall forever hold dear.

Does that make me delusional or an optimist?

I’m scared, I’m quaking, I can’t believe in such dreams.

Is it pessimism or just low self-esteem?

I think, overall, what you don’t understand

Is that I am an idealist at heart,

Who wants to change the world

And make a difference

And achieve all of my goals in life

And all of my wildest dreams.

I think, all considered, you won’t understand

That my pessimism and my pessimistic attitude

Are a part of who I am,

Without being inherent within my nature

And without meaning that I don’t have dreams and refuse to ever see the best.

Don’t you see the implications of what you are saying?

I clearly do have dreams,

Irrational and unhoped for as they might seem,

But hoping for them will only bring me pain:

Try being a disappointment,

Never wanted, always cast away, never achieving anything and constantly messing up.

Try for something, with all your heart and all your might,

Preparing yourself only to succeed.

Disappointment is the fate you shall achieve.

You see, you and I might have different approaches when it comes to possibilities of greatness,

But I have quite some mountains to climb and a limited reserve of hope,

So don't blame me if I wish to protect myself

Once and for all, for the rest of my life,

From the constant disappointment of being me.

[kyouka-supremacy]

Hey! I was summoned by the tags you put under my post bc I also very much enjoy discussing ethics. I might make this into its own post so I'll try to not elaborate too much...

I think that I can't just decide for everyone if the difference between doing good for the sake of goodness or in order to save oneself matters, but for me, in most cases, including Dazai's case, it doesn't.

I like to believe that morality is a choice one can decide to make, and I don't think it's fair to take that away from them, regardless on how they might feel on the inside. It's a wonderful thing to act morally because it's your "natural" tendency, but I think people also have the right to do so deliberately, for a reason that they choose, without their choice being minimised. They're two different processes for sure, but if the outcome is good, then the action is a good action, and, if being moral is a choice, then I don't think I have the right to decide that only one intention or emotion that will lead there is good enough.

Also, doing good for your own sake and for the sake of others are mutually exclusive at all. One feeds the other, and if we were to put every person's actions under such scrutiny, we would ultimately run in circles.

So, for people outside the story, I would say that the debate does matter, but for the sake of the people involved, it doesn't, because the outcome is the same, especially since Dazai is so opaque as a character, and what he really feels about the things he does is so hard to read, so at the end of the day all most of them experience is his actions.

[Post this is referring to] Thank you for your elaboration, I loved hearing your opinion on the matter!!! That's close to consequentialism, isn't it? The consequences of one's actions, how much good they produced, are telling of it being morally right or wrong. I don't necessarily agree, but that's definitely a valid way to see it!!! I personally believe one's intentions are the most relevant aspect to take into account when judging whether and action is ethically rightful or not. Note that that is judging the moral of the action itself, and not giving a judgement on the person; people can have a million reasons to act selfishly, and in my very “humans are always inherently good” worldview more often than not it's caused by society rather than an actual preference to not be altruistic. But that doesn't change the fact that even a good action, if it isn't moved by good intentions, won't ever be passable of being morally right to me. Besides, then, wouldn't the other way round work to? Someone well intentioned, who's however incompetent, and ends up with their actions putting more bad in the world– as long as they're acting with a true desire to help others for the sake of it, their actions can't be considered morally wrong for me.

To clarify, with reference to your ask; I don't think people who do something for selfish reasons, and end up doing good, are morally rightful; but if they decide to do good, well, isn't that a well-intentioned aim itself? Then I think they stop being selfish to the extension that they consciously decide they're going to do good. That's not morally reprinandable at all.

Now, regarding Dazai... Honestly, I don't think Dazai is a good person. Because he never meant to do good for the sake of it. But now, the thing is, I don't think anyone in bsd is meant to be interpreted as good or evil– nobody, not Atsushi, not Mori, no one. When it comes to bsd– I do think bsd expresses a more or less nihilist worldview. And I know pretty much everyone else disagrees with me on this, I know, I'm sorry. But I do think there lies an undergoing message that good and bad are ultimately the same, and equally meaningless– it's there in Oda saying “Neither good nor evil mean much to you”, it's there in the way it makes you root for mafiosi like they were the good guys, it's there in the way Dazai never even considered to make amends for the bad things he's done (because they were never bad to begin with, because good and bad mean nothing anyway), it's there in the way it constantly shows good people doing bad and bad people doing good in a way that basically equalises them. To me there's really no point in discussing whether Dazai is good, because he is most evidently not, but that's only because he was never meant to be interpreted as such to begin with. Please refer to this post for further details; it's not surprising at all that Dazai switching over to the “good side” didn't come with a radical change of heart, and that he basically stayed the same, because how could he become good when that's no different than being evil, and those both mean nothing anyway?

And I know most people see bsd's core theme as finding a reason to live, and maybe it is, but even then I think that wouldn't be by denying its nihilism, but rather accepting it and finding a reason to live in spite of it: to me all of bsd really sums up in “that, at least, is a little more beautiful”.

[bikowolf]

Ep2-3

RWBY Volume 9 Episodes 2 and 3. I want to start right away by saying that I am, all in all, satisfied with how these two episodes have gone. But let's remove the aching tooth immediately: NEGATIVES- The dubbing of the protagonists is mediocre as always; The intro is off-key, it just doesn't seem to have a precise rhythm; Yang's fighting animations are still bad for a 3D animation still showing us the "many punches animation" .... Here I want to say a platitude, but you had who learned from Monty and you fired him ... So it's the fault yours. POSITIVES- Ok, the keyword of these two episodes is rhythm, in fact the rhythm of these two episodes is treated so well that even in the moments of "explain" I didn't lose attention even for a second, great work keep it up; Ruby finally takes the reins of the story and pulls it where she pleases, this is VERY important for a series that is not only called RWBY (which reads as "Ruby" duh) but also for a series that has always given Ruby the role of leader. "But in Volume 8 Ruby leads the protagonists as a leader, right? Why is it different here?" Because the problem with the v8s is that Ruby, due to her lie to Ironwood, destroyed all of Atlas... it's not the best performance. Here instead we play on the "simple", but effective: This is where I'm on the side of the writers: "Don't make political stories if you can't handle them, make stories about things that don't have serious politics and play on archetypes and STOP!" Team Weiss, Blake and Yang are all petites and that means Ruby will get even more spotlight, GREAT! This is great for allowing the team and Ruby to gain ground in the story. MY RWBY TEACHER CRITICISM- RWBY problem has always been 1: "There are supporting characters, like JNR, Oscar, Qrow, who stole screen time from the leading ladies." This criticism of mine has always prompted fairly repetitive debates such as: "Ma Jaune is the protagonist" "The series is made to be a group" "Ruby, Weiss, Blake and Yang are not the only protagonists". But it's not true. Developing characters that aren't protagonists make viewing frustrating, like Nora's monologue about who is she without Ren, why aren't we here for that, RWBY doesn't stand for "The Tragedies of Nora" but RWBY is about Ruby, Weiss, Blake and Yang . Take this example and spread it on all the scenes that concern the development of the other characters that are not the 4 protagonists. Volume 9 (for now) shows just the opposite of this: The characters develop at their own calm and coherent, Blake and Yang play the couple of little girls when they are adults but IT'S OKAY! At least the two are not in T-pose for most of the episode and then do something ambiguous then return to T-pose. (Spoiler: that's what they did in previous volumes). The protagonists breathe, finally there are no idiots (sorry) like Jaune who has to show off as "The great leader but clumsy and inexperienced" (like Ruby), as "The warrior faced with a difficult choice, and the repentance of such choice makes him cry" (as Ironwood) ... Finally Jaune is cancelled. Not in the sense that he won't be there anymore, but the relevance of him MUST be put under the feet of the protagonists. He's a supporting character, that's all. These two episodes prove it. I close this by saying this: DO NOT STOP! This is the way to make RWBY good without a talented man. Cause this show wants to be indipendent from Monty, it doesn't needs to make it gloomy but different. Finally Yang is sassy! MY GOD! FINALLY! RWBY is a simple show with simple writing. Raising the level of the story prompts us to ask for consistency and logic that neither the writers are able to send us nor we are willing to see in this show. We want action! RHYTHM! we don't want the sentimental problems of two characters irrelevant to the show (Guess who I'm talking about? Nora and Ren? No. Qrow and Clover). But what is the problem, the flea, of this show? Despite all the improvements! ALL THIS PROTAGONIST DEVELOPMENT! FINALLY THEY HAVE SEEN THE LIGHT! it's a movie. I'm serious, this volume has the same relevance as a spin-off movie. And that saddens me a lot, because until something happens in connection with Salem and the development of that story, Volume 9 will have no relevance. If halfway through Volume 9 you get out there and push the story against Salem, the issue is swept under the rug but not fixed: All this coming and going in the world of fairy tales is nothing but a waste of time if it doesn't bring CONCRETE fruit to the story. I'm not talking about "character sentimental development" (because that should be the default) or "Oh, but Jaune might die" (Finally I would say), but I'm talking about "In this dimension they discover that the relics are a farce and Salem it defeats itself in this way." The deities? False! In truth they are creatures escaped from the world of fairy tales (like a kind of Undertale) and use their powers to confuse humans. That would be a HUGE plot twist but it's what I would honestly do to solve the BOREDOM problem that is the "Go there, get the relics... go there, get the relics... Watch out! Salem got the relic, then go back to get the stolen relic back (kind of like Death Stranding but in an action... BORING). Do you remember what I said before? RHYTHM! There's a reason I don't highlight that much, because if you watch all the scenes in volume 2-3 (especially the red prince one) you will feel that the actions, the music, the camera, everything works around a rhythm. This is doing an animation well. Not with "anatomical precision" but with RHYTHM. I want it to continue like this, even after returning from this world, I want them to take this as an example! You don't have to do things "right" to make them "beautiful".

Posted using PostyBirb

[seaweedstarshine]

literally black king Emma was so fucking good. we were robbed. Like on the one hand they should have let Matt Rosenberg cook but on the other hand. the really brutal Ruth death and rahne trans panic murder were a lot 💀

Oh you’re so so right — the mutant metaphor suffers from cis white writers, but I remember people calling it trauma porn like there’s no narrative purpose for there being a massive death count overall, and I'm like… mmmmmMmm.

Personal preference rambles as a found family heavy angst enjoyer (this is not a defense of Rosenburg X-Men), but in a general sense I really like when — so they might not get along, but they got each other, because as life keeps gloating it's hell to fight supremacy when you're fighting each other (not that causes of divisions amongst marginalized people are unimportant, but if you don't have your people, no one else will, this is how I feel; also not that anyone is obligated to loyalty towards a specific individual that harms them) — Hope shooting Scott in the head isn't fine, but what binds them is more important than grudges. Logan finally leaving his MCU-esque Post Credits Scene Era to be with Scott! The way Black King Emma (!!!) will stoop to any low as she manipulates Scott into doing what she wants, but she is trying to protect him, she worries when he's shot, and when the perceived advantage of their separation ends, she just welcomes them all into the Hellfire Club?? It's just cathartic for me.

There are some very significant caveats in this run that I only hope I remember well enough to speak on… The Morlocks deserved better, eons before anti-mutant hate got to that level, and between Jono and Dani's roles — the X-Men having overlooked the way it's always godawful for the most marginalized among them before it was quite this godawful for all of them, the hypocrisy, it could've been explored better here with less focus on Scott and Logan. Like in Sabretooth and the Exiles, sort of, but not entirely…

(I think sometimes this works better with side books. The Simonson New Mutants run is debatably my fav and overhated in my opinion.)

Yeah, Rosenburg X-Men is very flawed, and it's extremely valid not to be into it when you hold the same energy for Krakoa's flaws, but overall (for me) it really nailed the tension and the stakes and the angst and I was extremely hooked, especially with Age of X-Men meanwhile making choices in the other books.

(I might be misremembering a bunch, too, I literally just reread my college essay from almost exactly 5 years ago to try and remind me! I was low-key exaggerating in those tags where I called it a paper, it was a 3-page one-week essay with two sources which were Rosenburg UXM and the textbook. I also re-skimmed the Ruth death issue…)

…okay one more thing also I can't lie I was heavy into David/Ruth at the time and I read that issue like three times that week it dropped, I'm not about to say it she wasn't fridged for the purpose of setting up how bad it's about to get, nor that the interesting shit it did with her powers didn't literally just mirror the excuse to write out Destiny in a very concerning pattern, but at least the story was about Ruth's pain rather than that of those left behind (which is very different from, say, the focus being on Peter Parker's pain when Ms Marvel last died; and also very different from Rahne's death, which is the worst of the run)— anyway in 2019 I was just so happy to see Ruth again after that wildly OOC Legion series that didn't mention her while David was also being a plot device in Age of X-Men (which I didn't love). I had pretty much lost hope that my X-Men Legacy babies would ever be relevant again, so it was a win for me. Not as big as Way of X, but the bar was on the floor. That said a content warning was so needed to be at the beginning instead of a fucking suicide hotline at the end.

But the Rahne trans panic murder, god. Masterclass in taking the mutant metaphor to depict the most brutal things to happen to real marginalized people (without bothering to represent them?) and it goes grossly exploitative so quick. The way X-Men's lack of sensitivity readers shows…

ANYWAYS I haven't read it in years please take my opinions with a grain of salt.