#my exact point about stede gets addressed

[bloomeng]

i love stizzy but i don’t care for the tropes where stede— for lack of a better term— domesticates izzy

it feels too much like he’s trying to change izzy into a more palatable version of himself. not saying izzy couldn’t stand to be a bit nicer but the thing is they need to come to a compromise. after all izzy’s concerns are valid even if he’s doing a shit job of communicating that and stede did choose to become a pirate.

i get it tho as fans we want to give izzy nice things and have stede be nice to him, i just personally can’t get behind it when stede takes it too far bc it feels less about izzy being comfy and more about stede being comfortable

one thing i actually really liked about s2 was how izzy decided on his own to change and stede did as well and they met in the middle with this acceptance of who the other person was and made strides towards actually being friends

[blakbonnet]

HAPPY FOX DAY TO ALL THOSE WHO CELEBRATE! Today's a special special AOTW because our featured author this week is best beloved @asneakyfox 🦊

Fox, I genuinely think you're one of the greatest fandom philosophers of our times, and what you write is so much more than regular old meta. Because we're all playing in the sandbox here and while a lot of us lose sight of canon sometimes, you have all four feet firmly planted in the lovely source material we've been provided with. And you don't stop there, you try to actively engage with the community, especially making sure you are keeping an eye on all the differing opinions. I feel like this is why your thesis resonates so thoroughly with different people--it's not trying to prove a point, it's very 'holmes saw a dead body and ejaculated'. You are just so smart that you make the rest of us smarter, but it's never intimidating to talk to you, and I love love love that I get to read your stories and your thoughts because of this show and this fandom.

Fox, brilliant as ever, agreed to answer a few questions for me:

What's your meta writing process like? Do you think in disparate strings about scenes and then write them down as they come to you OR is it usually a conversation or a thought that eats at you until you sit down and untangle it?

generally i'll be thinking about something, usually because i saw another post (or had a conversation about the show on discord; special shoutout to the crew on @figmentof and @scarrletmoon's servers, and especially to @glamaphonic, anything i've ever said you thought was really insightful probably came out of a dm conversation with glam) and some part of a post about it will start writing itself in my head, and unfortunately once that process starts the only way to stop it is to write it down.

even more unfortunately i never know whether it's all going to flow out easily into a coherent essay right away, or if it'll be one of those things where i write two really good paragraphs that ought to go in the middle section of a post that takes a while to figure out how to structure; i just have to start and see where it goes. some meta i've written that got lots of notes was written all at once the moment the thought struck me and posted as soon as it was done, but there's also a few that have been sitting in drafts for months as i keep rewriting the same section without being sure where it goes next.

Favourite themes or characterisations you like to explore while meta writing? (things like Ed's fisherman era and what led to it, etc)

i guess if there's a big theme i keep coming back to it's ed's character arc over the course of the show, his relationship with violence and how it affects his perception of himself and how he has to grow through that to be ready to commit to his relationship with stede. one of the very first things i ever said about the show on tumblr, way back in summer 2022, was that ed's absolute deepest fear was that he is fundamentally unlovable, so it was really a delight to see s2 dive so hard into addressing the exact issues i'd been looking at so explicitly. and of course there's also a lot of fandom racism that plays into some takes that go around about ed, and i think it's really important to call that out and push back against those takes.

i feel like it would be kind of silly to not call out izzy here too. izzy plays an absolutely crucial role in highlighting those exact issues in ed's arc, and i honestly just think the way their whole relationship develops in canon is deliciously meaty and a lot of fandom takes seem determined to flatten it out into something much more boring. so it's important to me to try to highlight the ways you don't have to pretend izzy was a secret good guy all along to appreciate the role he plays in the story.

finally i guess this has only developed over the last several months but i guess one of my trademarks now is speculation about what got deleted from s2. i've always been good at the game of watching a movie and guessing at scenes that were cut or changed, and my spider-sense for that was going off like crazy as i watched s2, and i didn't want to get too speculative at first, but as information has actually come out from samba and vico and other sources, a lot of it's lined up with what i thought. and i'm really interested in how the ofmd writers' room approached storybreaking, so it's worth it to me to try to understand this.

Whose head is it easier to get into - Ed or Stede? Why?

i guess i already answered this! i love them both a lot, and i'd been writing meta for a good while before i consciously realized i'd written a LOT more about ed than about stede, and the ed posts tend to be individually longer than the stede ones too. i think some of this is because ed's arc reads super clearly to me while stede, despite being the main character, gets an arc that's a lot more subtle and internal in some ways (and also i do think suffered significantly from the cuts to the second half of s2). and some of it's because people can be Wrong On The Internet about ed in ways i feel the need to push back against more than about stede. but some of it's just, you know, vibe.

it's always interesting to me that nearly all prolific fic authors in this fandom have a clear very strong preference for which POV they prefer - i don't think all fandoms are like that - but i guess my own alignment is obvious.

Your personal favourite thing you've written that you'd like more people to read

the obvious answer here is the one actual fic i have written for this fandom, "Nothing Could Touch It" which came out of thinking about how there's some post-s2 fic about ed reckoning with this relationship with izzy that i really like but none of it quite got at how i feel like canon's framing it. (don't worry it's not all about izzy! stede's there and there's a bunch of cuddling!)

as far as meta goes though i would call out this as the one i'm probably proudest of, this is the one where i most completely tried to lay out how i saw the show framing ed's relationship with violence during the s1 hiatus, and i think after s2 it holds up pretty well. but also since i was just talking about how i don't say enough about stede, this is the post where i tried to lay out the stuff i really admire in stede as a character.

What is the one word that you think you use a lot?

i've got a bunch of verbal tics i overuse but the one i'm self-conscious about in meta lately is "reading against the text," which sounds so pretentious and lit-crit i really wish there were another good phrase for it. but i think it's really useful as a way to clarify that sometimes i'm saying a particular take is clearly not how the narrative of ofmd is framing something but that doesn't mean you need to stop interpreting it that way. reading against the text is really fun and i recommend it sometimes! but you'll have more fun if you're aware that's what you're doing!

If you were writing his arc, keeping in mind that he stays largely antagonistic in line with the show, how would you have resolved the Izzy problem: would you have made the same decisions the writers made and written a redemption by death OR do you think that the spirit of the show specifically demands Izzy get a good guy (or not as bad a guy) ending where we see his muppetification

one of the predictions i was most confident of before s2 was that if izzy were redeemed, he wouldn't be able to remain in the cast as a good-guy crew muppet afterward. (for this reason i thought the likeliest possibility was a slower redemption arc that wouldn't fully complete till the end of s3.) several times i tried to game out what role a fully redeemed izzy could possibly continue to play within this story, or what personality traits that he showed in s1 he could even hang onto after a full redemption, and i couldn't come up with anything that felt plausible. not "loyalty to your captain," because his devotion to blackbeard was clearly toxic at the root and would need to be purged entirely before it could be replaced by anything healthier; not yelling at people to stop having so much fun and work harder, because that could work in a different story but would run directly counter to the core themes of ofmd - so what's left? i went looking at popular izzy redemption fic that tried to address that question, and some of it came up with answers that worked in the context of a fic focused mostly on izzy, but it was never anything that could possibly work in a tv show that already had established themes and would continue to focus primarily on other characters. and izzy wouldn't be able to just fade into the background with the other muppets after all the focus on him a believable redemption arc would require. so i knew once he was redeemed he'd be done as a character one way or another.

and s2 i think bore that out, honestly in a much more obvious way than i expected - over the course of izzy's s2 arc he's basically divested of all his s1 personality traits until all that's really left by the end is saying twat all the time, and Guy Who Says Twat is not a role the story's going to particularly need going forward. to keep him around after that you'd need to give him enough new traits that he'd be for all practical purposes a new character anyway.

i do sometimes wonder about a world where izzy's s2 arc saw him be offered a clear chance at redemption and choose to reject it and get worse instead. i kind of missed antagonist izzy by the end, and i wonder if a lot of people who'd originally wanted a redemption for him wouldn't have been happier with that even if they didn't realize it - a descent into full villainy would have kept izzy and his relationships with both ed and stede more central to the plot right up till the end, and in particular the sexual aspect of his feelings for ed could have stayed very directly relevant, where the redemption arc necessitated resolving that very firmly to clear it out of the way as early as possible in s2. i never agreed that ofmd's themes necessarily meant redemption for izzy was inevitable - ted lasso was much more overtly a show about redemption than ofmd right from the start, and even ted lasso let at least one of its antagonists make it all the way to the end as an unrepentant scumbag. if there's anything that meant izzy really had to be redeemed imo it wasn't the overall spirit of the show so much as izzy's role in ed's arc - before anything else izzy's narrative role was always to be a walking symbol of the part of ed that fears vulnerability and holds him back from committing himself to love, and for ed and stede to be happily together by the end of s2, ed had to get to a place where he could see that part of himself as something he no longer needs in his life but also doesn't hate anymore. nothing could have symbolized that like having ed embrace izzy as he dies granting ed permission to just be himself.

Why OFMD 🥹

you know, i could say a lot here about how i think ofmd is genuinely incredibly well-written in some ways that are really unusual on american tv. season 1 in particular is just incredibly tight and elegantly plotted, and s2 is messier but that just makes it all the more interesting to look at the constraints they were under that led to that. my day job's in narrative and i really do professionally admire ofmd a lot, which is one of the reasons i tend to think about creator intent more than some people do when i'm writing meta - death of the author is a super valid perspective but personally i'm really interested in trying to figure out why the writers made the choices they made and what i can learn from that for when i'm in their position.

so all of that's true. but also we all know it's kind of beside the point here, this is a hyperfixation, it's not rational. i can tell you i watched the first nine episodes of our flag means death and liked it a lot but in what i would describe as a basically normal kind of way, and then i watched the tenth and at some point during that episode a rat inside my brain hit the dopamine spigot with a wrench and now it won't turn off so here we are.

aaaand if you've made it to this point, please join us in evil ganging up on fox with love by sending a lovely letter to them over on @ofmdlovelyletters who was also kind enough to make this header <3

[khruschevshoe]

OFMD Critique: Finales, Writing Backwards, and the Importance of Building Relationships

Continuing on the rambling meta bc it turns out there are a couple of people that responded well to my initial thoughts...

Am I the only one that felt like the OFMD Season 2 finale suffered from the exact same problem as the Game of Thrones or the How I Met Your Mother Season finales? Well, not exactly the same, but lemme explain.

The treatment of Izzy Hands in Season 2 of OFMD feels like when they sat down to write this season, they wrote his death scene first (for whatever reasons that might be, though likely for the sake of Ed's arc- we're not going to address my feelings on THAT rn), THEN backfilled his arc for the rest of the season based on that, but then didn't rewrite his death scene to address the stuff that organically happened when writing the rest of the season.

Like, for example, I've seen plenty of people point out that the deathbed apology from Izzy to Ed doesn't really work (I fed your darkness) both in regards to the sheer imbalance of damage shown onscreen between Ed and Izzy, but also doesn't work as a "putting Blackbeard behind us" scene when Izzy figuratively (and literally, if you count him as part of the group with the cannonball) killed his half of Blackbeard in the storm scene in 2x2, with whatever parts lingering in him killed with the unicorn scene in 2x4. After this point, his arc and his focus has very, very little to do with Blackbeard or hell, Ed in general besides the couple of comments made to Ed and Stede that cement that Izzy is happy that Ed moved on and found someone that makes him happy.

Izzy's arc has left Blackbeard behind already. He has already hit the emotional beat that the finale wants to retread.

And then the other part of his deathbed comments to Ed- "the crew loves you, Ed"- makes no sense from the Ed side of things. The show built up an arc for Izzy that would make people care when he died, but that arc was literally about the crew literally putting aside their differences/fear/distrust of each other to help, support, and accept Izzy as their figurehead, their protector, their friend, their recovery, their family, their (insert positive symbolism/metaphor for all of the VARIOUS implied flirtations here).

What did they have with Ed? Other than his moments with Stede and Fang, what relationships were built up before Izzy's death? Calypso's birthday included no scenes of the crew interacting with Ed other than the short Archie/Ed/Stede convo at the beginning. We get none of him talking to them when prepping for the party. He spends 2x7 and 2x8 with Stede, only having scenes with Stede, never building anything with the crew.

THE LAST SUBSTANTIAL INTERACTION ED HAS WITH THE CREW BEFORE IZZY DIES IS THE "INFLUENCER APOLOGY" IN 2X5 (other than with Fang in the boat). Holy shit, I didn't even realize that until I got to this point in the meta. I had realized that something felt wrong/off about the "the crew loves you line," but I thought that it was because 2x1-2x3 cast such a long shadow on the rest of the season that it was impossible to escape. No, there were cracks in the back half of the season as well.

All of which is to say: if you have to kill Izzy (which you really, really don't, btw, it makes little sense in a show where pretty much every character has survived a near death experience with nary a scratch, but for the sake of hypothetical), there is a way you can pull it off: you have the crew at Izzy's side as he dies instead of Ed. You have their relationship with Izzy at the forefront, because their relationship is the one that matters at this point in the narrative. You have Izzy die trying to save one of them, not by random gunshot.

And then after Izzy dies, you finally give the crew their agency back. You let Izzy's death be the last straw in THEIR arcs. You let them tell Ed that they cannot allow him to stay on the ship after everything. You let them tell him that they are putting their foot down, and he can go retire if he wants, but they will not let him destroy this crew anymore.

(Or, you know, you can have all of that with a death SCARE instead of an actual death, and allow Izzy to sail off into the sunset as a first mate instead of as a dead body. Because that would suit the tone of the show and the story better.)

But I have the feeling that point B (Izzy dying/his death scene) was the thing that was decided on first, and so the budget crunch/other factors may have led the writers into making the same mistake as so many before them have: writing point A out organically, and then failing to change Point B when it no longer fit the story they had written.