#my fatal flaw is not having a limit on what i do for fictional characters. monetarily anyway | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

sullustangin · 4 years ago

Note

Okay, strange question for Theron. I hat does he believe in. Beyond duty and doing things for the greater good.

That’s a good question! It’s going to get long, so some of this is beyond a cut.

Theron was raised as a Jedi until adolescence - his belief system is rooted in the existence of the Force. It exists in all living things, and some people can access and use it, while others cannot. The Jedi are the good guys. He was also raised as a citizen of the Republic. He believes in the Galactic Constitution, which bars slavery and grants all sentients certain rights. The Republic is a representative government with elections and enfranchised people choosing their leaders.

Duty and the Greater Good

“Duty” and "The Greater Good” concept have to be defined with Theron, because he is not a lawful character. He’s a neutral, leaning chaotic character in D&D terms. Lawful characters go by whatever society approves of; chaotic characters have their own internal compass. Neutral considers both. A great example of this is when Director Trant of SIS and Jace Malcom the Supreme Commander of Pub forces tell him to get the job done and basically ignore the fact that two planets full of people are going to be sacrificed to do it. Lawful characters do as the authority says.....and Theron decides to go rogue and disobey with a Jedi in order to at least save the second planet. His “greater good” is a lower death count, rather than guaranteed Republic victory. I would argue that Theron interprets his duty as belonging to a larger galaxy rather than exclusively the Republic and its political/military objectives; he is pro-Republic, no doubt about it, but there are limits. He’s also pro-Jedi, but there are limits -- some of them can be real asses. I discuss his alignment further here.

Going into Forged Alliances in SWTOR, we have a man who works for the Republic and endorses the ideals of the Galactic Constitution. He knows the Republic is not perfect. He does believe the Jedi are “right,” but he does have some issues with their attitudes toward non-Force users. They are not perfect. We get some very vehement statements in Annihilation about Theron’s experience with the Jedi after he was found not to be Force sensitive: the arrogance of the Jedi, how they looked down on non-Force users. He even applied this metric to Satele in their first real conversation with each other. I discuss this more here. This doesn’t make him anti-Jedi, but he doesn’t view them with the same rose-colored glasses he did as a youngling. Individuals aside, he follows the Light Side of the Force.

The Dark Side decisions that a Pub can make to please Theron in Forged Alliances/Shadow of Revan involve deceiving the Empire -- first, by destroying the Revanite cyborgs on Rakata Prime; second, by setting up perimeters around the Yavin base that track Imp movements just a little bit closer. The blowing up of cyborgs rather than fighting them is to prevent Lana and the Empire from scavenging them later. It’s not about killing them -- they as individuals are already dead. You have to kill them to get to the next room anyway. It’s just a matter of whether you give the Republic an edge by not permitting the Empire the opportunity. It’s a chess match. On Yavin, it’s about the Republic having more information than the Empire here as well. These aren’t traps or weapons that would hurt Imps -- it’s just about having more information. That is his duty to the Republic as an SIS agent while still supporting a cross-factional alliance to defeat a shared “Greater Bad.” So while dishonest and Dark Side and ‘anti-Jedi’, Theron still does things in support of a government that has the Galactic Constitution while doing no direct physical harm to the Sith Empire’s operatives (a rather Light Side-y solution).

What else does Theron believe in, besides all that?

Theron believes – most of all and with the most optimism -- in the future. We saw that at the end of Lost Suns. We see that when he chooses to save civilians on a planet he’s never met. We even see it in his Dark Side decisions in-game; he anticipates that the war will resume against the Empire, and he wants the Republic (and its Constitution) to have the best odds winning. I believe that Theron would rather have a rough life himself and save others in the future from the same work and suffering he’s gone through. Does he do it like a Jedi? Nope. He isn’t honest or honorable all the time, but he draws the line of sacrificing innocents or excessive for a cause. Does he do it like a traditional agent of the Republic, taking orders without question? Good Lord, no. Trant complains about that all the time in Lost Suns and Annihilation. Theron is Trant’s best agent, but half the time, Trant wants to throw him out a window or down a trash compactor because he doesn’t do things by the book.

I discuss in that alignment post how beat up Theron gets because he does things that are “right” in his mind, but not protocol. Theron fights for a brighter future. Based upon what he’s willing to do personally to ensure that happens, his life comes second to those yet to be born and a better galaxy for them. Call it Jedi virtue, call it a zealous belief in the Galactic Constitution -- Theron does it (and he meets his end that way in the Nathema Conspiracy, if the player chooses that path). This is also partially why he doesn’t have an SIS partner. Theron might be assigned to another agent, but he wants to do all the work himself, his own way. Trant has learned it is pointless to assign Theron a partner because the partner is left out and doesn’t even know when Theron gallivants off. His risk, his way.

So to be very specific, Theron believes in the future for others, not necessarily himself. Theron has a certain lack of selfishness paired with stubbornness that makes him put himself in danger because he believes there is some greater cause; he, the individual, doesn’t matter as much. We see this in other SIS agents -- they’d die in the line of duty without much of a second thought. I read about Lana’s early experience in the Talay initiative, and the SIS agents she encountered were particularly devout.

For Theron, that duty isn’t just to Republic or SIS -- it’s for the better future of the galaxy as well. We can also use this as part of an argument that suggests why Theron isn’t shown romantically involved with anyone unless he gets with the player. Theron thinks it would be nice if he survived to see this great future he wants for the galaxy and the Republic, but he understands he may not live to see it. That’s not fatalism or pessimism however. He knows what Jedi did during the Fall of Coruscant. He was always told by Ngani Zho that he was so loved by his mother that she had to give him up, so she wouldn’t have divided loyalties when it came to the good of the Republic. His personal happiness doesn’t rank very high here; it is virtuous and right for individuals to make choices that cost themselves something rather than others. Theron doesn’t like to be selfish.

During KotFE Theron leaves the Republic after they’ve accepted the political fiction that Saresh is out of office. Everyone knows she’s pulling the strings and promoting constant warfare against the Sith Empire, while bending the knee to Zakuul the entire time. They are oppressed, but she gets to have her little wars. Theron joins the Alliance because it is resisting an oppressive power that the Saresh doesn’t seem interested in throwing off and that the Empire can’t seem to throw off. In KotFE, you have Theron as a companion. He does NOT accept Republic memorabilia in order to raise influence -- I don’t think that’s an oversight, since Lana takes Imp memorabilia with enthusiasm. Theron believes in the Galactic Constitution and all of its principles – but the Republic is failing to do that right now by tolerating Zakuul and their systems of slavery. If you recruit Bowdaar, you do so by Fight Club or “Eternal Championship” or whatever, and it runs off slaves and people owned by others. This was what Theron worked against during his career in SIS prior to the whole Korriban thing….and now the Republic tolerates Zakuul’s use of it, as long as Saresh has her little wars with the Empire.

By KotFE, Theron no longer believes in his duty to the Republic, but in the Galactic Constitution. Now that the Jedi are gone, he doesn’t believe in them as much as the broader, greater good that the Republic never fully reached for due to its conflict with the Sith Empire.

This also brings us to the idea that Theron believes in the player. When all the things he valued in the Republic and SIS went to dust, he went to the Alliance, knowing that a key element was the rescue of the player from carbonite. Somehow, he thought this person – this key figure that he had worked with previously – would be able to head an Alliance that would save the galaxy one last time from the Sith Emperor.

With KotET, the player can decide whether they are a peacekeeper Alliance or a new Empire. Theron supports the player and doesn’t make any move to leave or go back to the Republic, regardless of the decision (a flaw in writing, in my personal opinion, but it is what it is). This is the game’s mechanic, but we may also interpret this as Theron’s belief in truth: we are what we say we are. A benevolent empire may not have elections, but it has a greater good in mind. The Republic claims to support all of these ideals in its constitution…but it doesn’t under Saresh. Even with a more brutal Eternal Empire, there is truth in advertising. We are doing this, that’s the way it is. We’re not hiding behind some Constitution that’s pushed to the wayside in favor of continued war with the Sith Empire. I know this is spinning the wheels hard to try to make it work, but Theron has to have rationale for staying, and it’s not provided in game. In Onslaught, we see a return of Theron’s temper; players who permitted high casualties on Corellia had Theron stomp out on them in anger. That is consistent with what we’ve seen previously, but the writing had made him somewhat of a sycophant to the player character for awhile; it was a good surprise for character development, bad if you were romancing Theron since you don’t get a smooch off him for that ending.

Now, if you go all Light Side for Theron, then it’s more easily explicable as to why he stays with the player – the Alliance does what the Republic will not, and he rather be in a place that does what the Republic should be doing, rather than be in a Republic that’s all talk and no action. He’s happy to return home to the Republic, if you make that choice in Onslaught. He’s also accepting of remaining independent. He only expresses concern with an Imperial alliance because he doesn’t want his home ground to dust....and all the people in it. All those little individual futures that we as Alliance commander can control -- and if we’re working to make them better, that coincides with Theron’s own beliefs.

Does Theron Shan believe in love?

The virtue of love, in the sense that one cares for the good of others and the galaxy, is approved of by Jedi. The idea of having someone, of bonding to someone and wanting to maintain that relationship – and the associated fear of losing that relationship – can lead to the Dark Side. Now, Theron may not buy into that as much as he did when he was a kid, but it might stick in the back of his mind, since unless the player romances him, he remains single. He’s also devoted to his ideals and his work, his duties. He’s a self-admitted workaholic -- that sort of kicks romance and personal love down the ladder of priorities.

On the other hand, Theron hasn’t been treated well by ‘love.’ Ngani Zho loved him… and left him without telling him the truth. Zho also told Theron all the time that his mother Satele loved him so much that she had to give him up….and we have yet to see her ever admit that to him, face-to-face. We can argue that the latest patch, Echoes of Oblivion, points toward that happening, but even then, she only indicates that to player, not to Theron himself. We saw Jace Malcom’s rejected paternal overtures in Annihilation and then alienation from Theron during Iokath. Player choices decide whether that relationship is recoverable or not.

In an unromanced game, Theron is alone, but not necessarily lonely. We can view this as sort of a holdover from his Jedi youth and as his adult life as a spy – love is a good thing in the galaxy but attachment is not, given the risks he takes. There is no suggestion that he’s romantically involved with another NPC, unlike other games or even the Lana/Koth thing -- which is ultimately left up to player interpretation as to what exactly that was.

This next bit is more subjective, because it’s how I’ve interpreted the Theron romance to this point on neutral/Light-leaning characters, specifically a smuggler. I think prior to the playable character, Theron believes in love, but once again, not for him personally. If the player romances him, it’s a whole different bantha wrangle.

Love is difficult. Being mutually attached is difficult for Theron, because most normal people want a certain back-and-forth, a certain amount of information sharing before they really commit. Theron can’t give as much as they can. Hook-ups are physically satisfying, but emotionally lacking.

I know some authors have him as a someone who slept around a lot, while others have him as a serial monogamist. Many just don’t discuss the idea of him being with anyone else besides their playable character. I’ve written him as someone who can get hook-ups, can do a relationship or two seriously, but also has long spats of celibacy mixed in because he’s busy working. The greater good isn’t going to happen by itself, so Theron works at the cost of his personal relationships. Because of being a spy and the issue of his parentage, he can’t disclose his work routine or why he’s come back with a new scar – it’s easier to let the relationship fall to the wayside than explain. Where are his parents? Who are his parents? Easier to let the relationship go than explain.

Theron is a consummate professional. Even in the era of KotFE/KotET, Miot and Koth refer to him as ‘stiff’ or ‘stuffy’ and not knowing when to “not work.” His duties come before his personal desires. This is why we have to get through all of Rishi before we even get to kiss Theron, plus another few weeks/months on Yavin before they playable character and Theron hook up. However, if we take a look at the player’s path from Korriban or Manaan (Pub and Imp side encounters with Theron), it’s a courtship over the course of a half-year or more. There are a lot of headcanon explanations for this, ranging from playable character inexperience, demisexuality, “behind the scenes” action that emphatically states that they were hooking up long before we saw them, and so on.

I took what I saw on screen to be a signal of Theron’s professionalism -- no time for lovin’ until the job is done -- but also his attachment issues. I’ll do another post on this later, but I’m writing him with the label “fearful avoidant attachment” in mind. Basically, Theron wants to be attached to someone, desperately, but he is terrified of it. I don’t blame Satele for this one – this is all about Theron not only being ditched by Ngani Zho, but also then being dismissed from the Jedi Order because he wasn’t even Force sensitive to begin with. Suddenly, the father he knew and the way of life he thought he was going to follow til the day he died – gone. Now he has to integrate with ‘normal people life’ where you’re supposed to do the personal life attachment stuff that Jedi frowned upon. In my fan fic, Theron confesses that SIS and his duty to the Republic – more accurately, to the future – take the place of the Jedi order. He attaches himself to that more readily than individuals.

The playable character changes Theron; he says that in his “I’m back at SIS” letter. He’s more open to teamwork and reaching out to Satele. Again, fans have run with this, including having Theron in a relationship with the player until the Eternal Fleet incident, having them just hook-up and leave it at that (particularly if Imperial), or something in between. Ziost marks a time where Theron is both relieved and embarrassed the player is there to catch him when he falls. The last we see of Theron in-game Pubside prior to Popsicle Time, he says he won’t hesitate to reach out (unlike what he did this time).

Then we get the “For When You Wake Up” letter. It reveals that Theron is in love, whether or not he wants to openly acknowledge it yet. He doesn’t send a letter to an unromanced player stating that the fact they’re still alive is “the thing that keeps [him] going.” And he’s also worried, nervous, or even scared that the feelings are not mutual -- “I don’t want to presume.”

The Theron romance starts in KotFE the night of his arrival. The kiss can be a tentative “let’s try this,” and then dating starts. I took it as “let’s go back to my place” and a full-blown committed relationship starts between Theron and my smuggler. There are other interpretation in between. Any way a person shakes it, Theron had been holding on to his Yavin hook-up for five years in his heart. Based upon letters you get throughout these two expansion pacs, Theron still has workaholic tendencies. He still struggles with the writing of words and expressing love publicly – but he is attached, and painfully so, as we see in Chapter 12, when the player goes on an impromptu camping trip with Marr and Satele. In my interpretation of all of that, love is still difficult – but not because of the reasons Theron had prior to Eternal Fleet, when he was fully committed to SIS and the Republic. It’s because in order to save the galaxy from the Sith Emperor, the player may have to be sacrificed for the greater good. Theron can’t step into their shoes on this one; he can’t take their place.

After the main KotET chapters, we see the Traitor arc and all of its flaws – but also the consistency of Theron’s character, if we remember how he believes in a better future, even if he doesn’t get to live to see it. That does include potentially sacrificing his romantic relationship with the player and possibly his life as well. If the player chooses to kick Theron out of the Alliance, the question of where he goes next is valid – he won’t go back to the Republic, and he’s not an Imperial. Where is Theron Shan, in those player universes?

If Theron (and his romance) survives to Echoes of Oblivion, we see a letter that is downright gleefully sweet. His mother isn’t dead, and it’s because of you that he has a chance to try to make something of that relationship…again. I’ve expressed my skepticism about this, since this is the exact set-up we had prior to Eternal Fleet, and then Satele ghosted Theron. We’ll see; I may be a bit of a cynic or an angstmonger. The point is, the way the romance is written to this point, Theron is happily in love with his partner/spouse. Love is for him, after all.

Even without the romance, a living Theron in the Alliance (or whatever it is now) in Echoes of Oblivion is one that has attachments to friends and potentially family again. There is a future -- and he’s in it. That may have been more than what Theron was anticipating when we first met him at 23, nearly 17(!) years ago.

#swtor #theron shan #headcanon #character analysis

27 notes · View notes

bigskydreaming · 4 years ago

Note

IGN’s recent Bat-focused article (Batman: What Does Red Hood Need to Do to Get A Good Story?) praises fanfic writers and also is an amazing critique of how stagnant Jason has become under recent DC management and I’m so surprised at how good it is and how well thought out the solutions were

Hmmm. I just looked it up and I mean, I’m not trying to start anything but I both agree and disagree? Like, it makes some points for sure, I mean, its not like its saying things that I haven’t said a thousand times about Dick, like.....these characters need to be allowed access to a full range of emotions, both good and bad, in order to be fully fleshed out, so I mean yes on that premise alone I absolutely agree this is as true for Jason as it is for Dick or anyone else.

Tbh my only real criticism of the piece is it thinks Jason exists in a particular predicament the other characters aren’t in as well. And that I just don’t agree with, like they kinda lost me a bit with their first paragraph:

His complexities and moral ambiguity make him a compelling and distinct character among his more strait-laced Robin-brothers. Sadly, the character has seen little growth since his rage-filled reintroduction into comics. The ‘former Robin becomes a villain’ idea was enough for DC to coast on for a while but since rejoining the heroes, Red Hood has done little else.

First off, this may just be me being pedantic but I’m ALWAYS going to go fetch a grain of salt before continuing reading anything that pits Jason against his brothers in a war of his moral ambiguity against their strait-lacedness. Because to me, that’s just a fundamentally shallow view of the Batfam that caters to the idea that they each must have their own distinct niche in order to be fully viable individual characters, when a) no, and b) they don’t fit neatly into the niches people keep trying to slot them into and it never ends well for anybody.

Like Jason is morally ambiguous in a lot of ways too, yes, but umm, even if we assume that the writer is only speaking of Dick, Tim and Damian, we’re talking a guy who beat the Joker to death with his bare hands and has ten assassins and mercenaries on his speed dial and who co-led the Outsiders, a guy who was deeply immersed in weighing the pros and cons of getting revenge for his father by getting Captain Boomerang killed and is forever being DMed by Ra’s because he’s convinced he can get Tim to say He Has Some Points Actually, and the kid who was an assassin with a body count by age ten and who has struggled constantly ever since his debut to define his OWN personal view of morality that is not wholly predicated on what he was taught by any single individual.

And this is a big part of where I part ways with the article, because I think it falls into the same trap that a lot of people do by believing fanfic is inherently better by doing the same thing from just a different angle. Fanfic CAN be better than the canon, I absolutely believe that, I believe it is at times, but to do so, it has to like, BE BETTER. It has to do things differently, and not just paint a slightly different veneer over the same things. Like, pedantic though it might be, I outlined the above issue because its a mode of thinking the canon absolutely falls into again and again, and just like the writer of that article themselves, like....I think fandom as a whole is no different?

Like, yes there are great stories about Jason out there, some writers have done great and interesting things with him, but that doesn’t mean there’s not a huge trend in fandom of doing the exact same thing I see here.....which is honestly a huge part of the exact same problem the article is decrying canon for......LIMITING Jason (and all the Batfam) by reducing them and their stories to finite niches as a way of spotlighting them as different from their siblings.....except they’re not that different! And that’s okay! They don’t have to be! Families can have lots in common, families DO have lots in common due to like.....shared variables during their formative years.

I mean Jason was heavily influenced by environmental factors in how and where he grew up before he ever met Batman, but like the article goes into itself, he was no less influenced by Bruce himself as his father figure.....which is something he absolutely has in common with his siblings, thus its not hard at all to see how his siblings could have similar complexities and moral struggles that stem from trying to reconcile Bruce’s influence with the many other things and people that have influenced their childhoods.

And similarly, while the article is dead-on about Jason’s stagnancy....this is something that applies in equal measure to the rest of his family, because they’re all facing the same issues in terms of how DC views and utilizes them, and fandom as much as it likes to condemn DC for doing just that....frequently does the same thing. Like, Jason’s stuck in canon, absolutely......but Dick keeps being popped out into his own microcosm to experience a couple years of stories that essentially turn him into completely different characters isolated from every communal part of his character’s history, and then ERASE everything that’s happened at the end of each of these stories and reset him to square one.....and that’s just a different kind of stagnancy that again, still never allows for actual character progression or development. Tim has LITERALLY been regressed back to Robin, like a hard reset that’s its own kind of stagnancy and Damian has had years of character development upended just to kick him back to where he started, effectively strip away all the connections he’s developed at least in any meaningful way, etc.....and the same holds true for Babs and Cass and Steph and even Bruce himself IMO, in a lot of ways.

Its absolutely a problem, but its a problem that extends far beyond just Jason even if he is a great example of it. And its also a problem that extends into fic itself, and that’s why I don’t agree with a lot of the conclusions that article draws beyond just the fundamental “these characters need to be allowed access to a full range of emotions.”

Yes. That. That right there, THAT I think is crucial, but I think that writer needed to widen the scope a little to take in the full impact of what that actually MEANS for the characters....so as to not accidentally repeat the same problem they’re being critical of by essentially arguing for a full range of emotions for Jason....while still defining or viewing Jason through a finite lens of “the more morally ambiguous Bat character, at least as compared to his brothers.”

Because its that last part that’s so detrimental, because it seems like such a little thing at first, until you realize that essentially its just putting a ceiling, a cap on how far those full ranges of emotions can be expressed. Like the problem with Dick Grayson in canon and fanon is NOT that he can’t be written with a full range of emotions.....its that his character absolutely can encompass a wide range of opinions and viewpoints and emotional stances from “I don’t believe in killing as a first option” to “I absolutely can, will, and have beaten a damn clown to death for joking about murdering my brother”.....and he can still walk away as Dick Grayson after expressing both those things, because his character is big enough to include them both. HE’S not limited as a character, its canon writers and fandom writers that both heap artificial limitations of their OWN on him, say that his character is so defined in such a specific way that there’s no way for the latter expression of his character to actually be IN character.....and the fatal flaw here is fully fleshed out characters are never just one thing. They don’t fit in niches anymore than people do, and notice the problems we all run into when we try and pigeon hole people as being just one thing, like humans can’t be contradictory or act against their own self-interest or be hypocritical or evolve or even regress past prior viewpoints....basically, any time you try and sum up a human being in one line, no matter how accurate that description is, there’s still SOME things that are going to be left out of that picture.

Now, these things don’t always have to matter that much, like if I look at a serial killer and say that’s a serial killer, like, I might be leaving out of the picture that once he helped an old lady across the street and didn’t kill her and he doesn’t even know why, and I for one, simply do not care that I leave that out of the picture. Its irrelevant to the big picture for me. I can acknowledge that it adds a smidgen of nuance to that particular picture and then go yeah but also I don’t care, nuance denied.

But in terms of fictional characters, these things that get left in the discard pile when we try and sum up characters as just one thing, like, they can be hugely significant, because characters unlike real people, are simply WHAT WE MAKE OF THEM. That stuff that’s been left out of the big picture look at that character because its stuff most people to DEFINE what that character looks like have deemed irrelevant....its still there, and still perfectly relevant for anyone who wants to pick that stuff up and make something of it, use it to change the overall picture or even just point to ways and places that picture can absolutely encompass and include these other elements and STILL fundamentally be that same picture, that same character.

And this isn’t to say that characters can never be written out of character, its to say that usually IMO what ACTUALLY makes the difference between something being out of character and something just being an unexpected but still valid character choice is just.....how these things are executed. The latter is when writers make the effort to JUSTIFY their character choice, to sell audiences on why and how this is absolutely something this character would do, to take them on a journey of what led the character to making this choice and let them see how those steps actually line up, that’s an actual journey that character might take. The former is when writers just don’t bother and are just like, well here’s a thing that character did, and you know it was in character because well that’s the character and that’s what I wrote them doing lol, what more do you want. No. Yawn. Next.

But the trick is if you’re going to try and make a character a SPECTRUM of emotions and choices rather than just a same datapoint recurring over and over again endlessly, a literal sticking point that never advances, never progresses, never changes......you have to actually give that character free range to utilize that spectrum of emotions and choices.....not just confine them to accessing all those possibilities but ONLY within a narrowly defined niche that is its own kind of limitation.

A character can START from a logline, absolutely. Can BEGIN in a narrative niche as a way to INTRODUCE them as seemingly different from their surroundings or their peers when they do not yet have the backstory, the evidence of past stories and character choices readers can use to interpret their actions or guess their choices.....but narrative niches, IMO, are meant to have a shelf life, an expiration date. They’re a seed for characters to grow FROM, to grow PAST, not return to over and over again.....because that’s when a niche just becomes another house that stagnancy built.

Anyway, thanks for the thoughts and the article mention.....it was an interesting exploration of thoughts for me even if I didn’t ultimately agree with a lot of what was already said....still a worthwhile read though I think and I mean hey, its cool if you still agree with it more even if I don’t, lol. This is just my take.

14 notes · View notes

juleswritesbookreviews · 5 years ago

Text

03. The Witch’s Kind, Louisa Morgan

**SPOILER WARNING**

Genre: Historical fiction, fiction, women’s literature

First Impressions: This is my second time reading a novel by Louisa Morgan. I really enjoyed her other novel A Secret History of Witches, so when I saw this on my Goodreads feed I knew I had to get it and read it. For first impressions, the cover gave off the vibe of a vintage journal from days gone by that was found in a long-abandoned trunk in a dusty attic. Unfortunately, this isn’t a sequel to A Secret History of Witches, rather, it’s a whole new standalone book with a whole new cast of characters. Personally, I didn’t mind it not being a sequel, as often sequels (and prequels) can be hit or miss.

Summary: Told over two periods, we follow Barrie-Anne Blythe as she navigates her life and slowly grows as a person.

What I liked: The main characters, Barrie-Anne and Charlotte Blythe, were written so realistically I almost thought I was reading Barrie-Anne’s diary. Barrie-Anne herself was an incredibly likable heroine with an uncommon name, and I loved how her character development took her from wanting to fit in and being ‘normal’ to accepting the “Blythe Family Talent” and standing up to her schmuck of an ex-husband. Charlotte, her aunt, was also written in a way that I particularly enjoyed. While she is not overwhelmingly affectionate, she is always there for Barrie-Anne and provides support when Barrie-Anne needs it the most while also respecting her own decisions. Charlotte is also an LGBT character, but rather than that being a focal point of her character, Louisa Morgan gracefully tackled the problems and insults lesbians had to face back in the early half of the 20th century. When Barrie-Anne finds out, and her aunt tells her about her past lover Georgia, Barrie-Anne is confused but loves her aunt regardless. I really enjoyed how Louisa Morgan didn’t draw out this confession between the two women, as it would it have been out of character for both women who typically are not dramatic or overly affectionate.

This same kind of ‘I’m confused but I’ll love you regardless’ mentality is also used when Emma is discovered to have gills behind her ears. Barrie-Anne, while uncomfortable watching her foundling happily breathe under water, does not let this affect the way she interacts with Emma and she doesn't love her any less. Hell, Barrie-Anne even fatally shoots her ex-husband Will when he attempts to abduct Emma. When he tries to bargain with her and manipulate her through any remaining shreds of love she may have for him, it doesn’t work - another thing I really liked was that Barrie-Anne does not think she can fix Will, and knows that he is trash and will never change. She ultimately is better off without his crusty, liar self.

The novel does an excellent job of showing that love can be expressed in alternative ways and that is a large part of why I love it.

What I Didn’t Like: Throughout the novel, the ‘blythe family talent’ of water divination, or scrying, is mentioned and shown. However, it’s never fully explained, and I wish it was because knowing the limits of a magical ability is kinda needed. For example, it’s a water-based magic where the user dips either a finger or a hand into water, but what are the limits of how much water is needed to fully use the talent? Charlotte uses a cup of coffee once, but when Barrie-Anne stands in a canal and gets wet she does not have any premonitions or visions.

Also, what is Emma? A mermaid, or fish-hybrid, or even an alien, as the book touches on the Roswell UFO fandango and heavily hints that Emma may be an alien while never actually saying yes or no. I really wish the book had definitively said what Emma was.

Overall Reading Experience: I enjoyed the book immensely, and was drawn into it almost immediately. The characters were incredibly well-defined and three dimensional, with flaws that anyone would have. I kind of wished that the book delved more into what Emma was, and the history of the Blythe family wishes, but overall the book was excellent as-is.

Overall, I give this book five stars out of five. It was an all-around excellent story, and the aforementioned elements in the novel made it a real treat to read.

Do I recommend this book? If you enjoy novels that really suck you in and build a world up around you that you’ll be remiss to leave, I recommend this book for you. The historical elements are also interesting and not boring, so if you’re looking for historical fiction but don’t want to read about knights in shining armour or a steamy romance involving long-dead members of the British monarchy, then I really really recommend Louisa Morgan’s books for you.

- Jules

#books #book review #women's literature #women authors #fiction #bookblr #reading #goodreads #reading recommendations

3 notes · View notes

commentaryvorg · 5 years ago

Text

Danganronpa V3 Commentary: Part 5.22

Be aware that this is not a blind playthrough! This will contain spoilers for the entire game, regardless of the part of the game I’m commenting on. A major focus of this commentary is to talk about all of the hints and foreshadowing of events that are going to happen and facts that are going to be revealed in the future of the story. It is emphatically not intended for someone experiencing the game for their first time.

Last time as we began the conclusion of trial 5, Kaito was doing his best to keep everyone’s spirits up even now that they know he’s a murderer, then he started recounting Kokichi’s plan, in which Kokichi still did not remotely acknowledge any of his responsibility for Miu and Gonta’s deaths, was still keeping several bits of truth from Kaito and only told him what he needed to know to understand the plan, was brokenly obsessed with “winning” the game despite how stupid an idea that was, didn’t really sacrifice all that much since he’d been convinced from the start he wasn’t going to survive anyway, and cared more than anything about not having been boring, leading to his whole plan counterproductively giving the audience exactly what they wanted.

We’re still in the midst of the conversation about Kokichi, just after the bit in the flashback where he said he wasn’t boring.

Maki: “Then… he blackmailed you by using me?”

Kaito: “No. I agreed to his plan once I heard the words ‘ruin this killing game’.”

This is important and I really appreciate that Kaito makes this point. He’s not saying he wouldn’t have done it just for Maki’s sake – he shouldn’t even need to explain that obviously he’d do it for that reason because of course he’d give his life for one of his sidekicks – but if it was solely to protect Maki, there would have been no need to hide in the Exisal and lie to them for the whole trial. Kaito is making it very clear here that even if Maki’s life wasn’t on the line, he would still have done this for the chance to ruin the killing game. Either one of those two things alone would have been enough to make him kill Kokichi – but only this was enough for him to go along with the rest of the plan. He was in on this plan for its own sake. (While still not for the same reasons as Kokichi.)

Kaito: “He was crazy, but that let him come up with some crazy plans… And we needed a crazy plan in order to stand a chance against Monokuma. I bet on that chance.”

Kaito is quite readily acknowledging by now that Kokichi’s plans are better than anything he could have come up with. He just relied on Kokichi’s plan a tiny bit too much, since there were flaws in it too that Kaito overlooked because he assumed Kokichi knew better.

Kaito: “I didn’t have any other choice… Cuz… I’m outta time.”

He would ideally have liked to do something less drastic and less murderous and less painfully deceptive towards his friends for his chance at saving everyone. But just like Kaede, he was on a time limit, and that’s why he took the only option available to him.

And, okay, so I’ve been complaining this whole time about how stupid it was of Kokichi to use Kaito as his accomplice and not Shuichi. But, to be fair, he did have a reason for doing so, and it’s this. He knew that Kaito would agree to this plan under these circumstances, even without Maki being a factor, because he knew Kaito was dying and desperately wanted to be a hero in the time he had left. It’s likely that Kokichi giving Kaito the option of using the Electrohammers on the escape tunnel earlier this chapter was partly a test run to see if Kaito was desperate enough to swallow his pride and accept a plan of Kokichi’s if it seemed like the best way to save everyone – which he did. It is also possible that Kokichi’s efforts to jab at Kaito’s issues and contribute to his breakdown during trial 4 were him playing a very long game to increase the chances that Kaito would be desperate enough to prove himself after that disaster that he’d be willing to do this. I don’t think I want to give Kokichi’s forward-planning skills and manipulative string-pulling quite that much credit, though.

Meanwhile, getting Shuichi to agree to this plan would have been a lot more difficult because none of the factors that made Kaito willing to do it despite how murderous and deceptive it was applied to Shuichi. Still, even given that, having Shuichi do it would have been the better option by far. The chances of getting Kaito to agree to the plan may have been essentially 100%, but the chances of the plan actually succeeding in that form were something like 1% thanks to Shuichi’s awesome detective skills. Meanwhile, getting Shuichi to agree maybe stood only, at most, like a 50% chance of happening, but the plan in that form would have been pretty likely to succeed, maybe 50% again, if not more. That adds up to still have a way greater chance of success than the Kaito version of the plan. But nope, Kokichi massively underestimated Shuichi’s detective skills and massively overestimated his own totally-genius schemes in the face of Shuichi’s deduction (whether genuinely or just through fervent lying to himself that he couldn’t possibly lose), and so he decided it would be better to go with the version of the plan that would definitely happen in the first place.

This also means that, essentially, Kaito was manipulated into going along with this plan by Kokichi. Kokichi knew Kaito’s personality and weaknesses well enough to know that if Kaito was put in this particular position and presented with this plan as his only chance to save everyone, he would never choose anything else. It’s a lot like how Kokichi also knew that, if presented with the despairing “truth” and told that the only way to save everyone was to mercy kill them, Gonta would never have done anything other than what he did. At least Kokichi didn’t lie to Kaito while presenting him with this, but he still deliberately manufactured the situation so that this was his only option, when there were any number of other, better ways Kokichi could have helped Kaito to be a hero and save everyone if he’d wanted to do so.

It’s kind of similar, actually, to the way Tsumugi has been manipulating the “characters” in her story to act according to her script, in order to cause the first three murder cases and also Maki’s attempt to kill Kokichi in this chapter. Tsumugi knows how she wrote her characters to be, and then she engineers circumstances and Flashback Lights to push them into acting in a specific way because that’s the only thing that character would ever do in that situation, even though they’re still acting of their own free will. The motives in cases 1, 2 and 3 (and an attempted one in case 5) were crafted by Tsumugi, while the real motives in cases 4 and 5 were crafted in just the same way, but perhaps even more expertly, by Kokichi.

Not that that should diminish Kaito’s decision to do this, just like we shouldn’t diminish that Gonta was in fact willing to kill everyone to protect them from the despairing truth even if there were lies and manipulation involved. Just like we also shouldn’t for any of the choices made by anyone in this game simply because they’re “fictional” and were written to always act that way – everything has always been real to them.

Maki: “Time…”

Shuichi: “Kaito… You mean, your health…?”

Upon hearing this, Shuichi joins the dots and immediately realises that the illness they all knew Kaito still has really is fatal after all.

Maki: “But you said you were fine! You told me not to worry about it anymo—”

It’s about time you learned a thing, Maki: Kaito saying that he’s fine should never be taken as evidence of anything at all.

Kaito: “Ah, my bad. That was a lie.”

At least he’s apologising for lying, though! He does so very briefly and casually, probably because he doesn’t want them to think too hard about just how much he was lying to them about this, but he does feel bad about it, even if it was all for the purpose of not worrying them and continuing to support them.

Kaito: “Haha, yeah it’s pretty bad. Honestly, I’m at my limit just talking.”

Kaito is wearing one of his biggest smiles as he says this, still acting like nothing’s wrong even as he admits that things are very wrong. This is what a Kaito who is willing to admit weakness to his friends looks like – and he still looks like exactly the same Kaito! Imagine if he’d acted this way in chapter 4: admitting that he’s sick and dying and in a lot of pain so that everyone knew what was up and could prepare for the worst and help him if he needed it (and work towards saving him), but still continuing to be his usual cheerful and encouraging self on top of it all anyway. He wouldn’t have sacrificed any of his ability to inspire them by admitting this! Seeing him that way while knowing what he’s fighting through to be like that would be even more inspiring than Kaito normally is! He really is such an idiot about that; he never had anything to fear from showing them his weakness at all.

Also, despite that it apparently hurts Kaito to even talk at this point, he’s not going to let that stop him from continuing to talk at length right up until the end. Words are the best thing he has, and he’s still got so much he needs to tell them.

Kaito wonders how he got sick anyway, and Shuichi suggests it’s the virus from the meteorites.

Tsumugi: “But weren’t we supposed to be immune? We were selected because we didn’t—”

Monokuma: “Perhaps the virus was dormant when you were selected for the Gofer Project…”

Tsumugi, of course, already knows the story of Kaito not being immune since she wrote it, so really this is her setting up Monokuma to be able to explain it, since one of the students explaining it would look kind of suspicious. They make a good double-act.

Kaito: “I dunno what you’re talking about, but… I guess I’m pretty screwed, huh?”

It is really impressive how Kaito is able to sound so casual about the fact that he is definitely going to die and there’s nothing he can possibly do about it.

Kaito: “Well, I knew this was coming. That’s why I agreed to Kokichi’s plan.”

This is the second time in this conversation Kaito has said “I did it because I was running out of time”. Which is true, but it doesn’t explain what he was running out of time for. Unlike Kaede, this time limit only applied to him, but it’s not like this plan would ever save his life. The reason Kaito agreed is that, having felt like he’d failed so much up until this point, he desperately wanted one last chance at being a hero and playing a part in saving everyone before he died. He couldn’t bear to just die for nothing.

But Kaito doesn’t tell them that it was about himself wanting to be a hero. Because he doesn’t need to. This was never about letting everyone else see that he’s the hero; it was simply about actually being one, even if nobody else ever fully realises it. It’s exactly like what he did earlier in the chapter when he gave up on his own escape plan and took on Kokichi’s instead. Kaito can be quietly satisfied with what he’s done here without having to gloat about it, unlike a certain someone who ruined his own plan by doing just that.

Kaito: “Kokichi left me with a whole outline of it. I freaked out when I read it.”

Kaito shows a thing with diagrams and flowcharts which is a separate thing from the script. I kind of wish we could get a better look at it. From what I can make out, the diagram seems to be a very rudimentary depiction of someone getting crushed, but not by the hydraulic press, so maybe this was an earlier version of Kokichi’s idea before the hangar opened up and he realised exactly how he could do it. I imagine the flowchart describes all the various possible events in the trial and how each of them could be directed towards the desired goal. Predictably, the flowchart appears to end on only one possible outcome, because obviously Kokichi’s plan was definitely going to succeed no matter how the trial played out and there couldn’t have been the slightest chance he was ever going to lose.

Kaito: “It was a pretty good plan. I thought we might be able to trick Monokuma. But I knew Shuichi’d see right through it in the end!”

Of course he did! Because Kaito has unshakeable faith in Shuichi’s detective skills!

Kaito: “Haha, and that’s exactly how it went! Nice job, Shuichi! You’re really something!”

This is wonderfully at odds with what Kaito was just explaining about the plan and the lengths he and Kokichi went to for it. Shuichi ruined it all, but that’s awesome of him! It’s so lovely that Kaito doesn’t once blame Shuichi or act angry at him for doing this even though it did mean that they missed out on the best-case outcome. He knows that Shuichi just did what a detective should do, and he probably realises that it’d be unreasonable to expect Shuichi to have figured out his motive for the plan and therefore not try and dismantle it until it was already too late. No matter what, Kaito does not want Shuichi to feel guilty and responsible for what’s happened here. Shuichi already has enough of a problem with blaming himself unnecessarily when bad things happen, so there’s no way Kaito’s going to make that worse.

Kaito: “That’s why I was able to get on board with Kokichi and lie to you like that.”

That’s not why he got on board with Kokichi – he did that for the chance that it’d succeed, which is the complete opposite of the fact that he believed Shuichi would make it fail. Still, it was probably a little emotionally easier for Kaito to tell all those lies when he believed so strongly that Shuichi would see through them all in the end.

Kaito: “Even if I messed stuff up during the trial, I knew Shuichi’d see the truth.”

This does not actually make sense. He’s saying that Shuichi would have compensated for his mistakes to keep the plan on track, when really Shuichi would have capitalised on Kaito mistakes to ruin the plan more and reach the truth quicker. But I think Kaito probably realises it doesn’t make sense and is just trying to present things in as positive a light as possible to prevent Shuichi from feeling bad about what he did.

{Later addendum edit: Whoops, never mind, I misinterpreted this line. Because Kaito often uses the phrasing “messed up” to mean making mistakes, I assumed that was what he meant here too even though it didn’t quite make sense. It turns out, based on the Japanese version of this line, that Kaito actually means “messed stuff up” in the sense of “made everything confusing”, in which case, yeah, of course that makes sense.}

Kaito: “Heh. Just what I’d expect from my sidekick.”

Kaito is still calling Shuichi his sidekick!!! This is an extremely important thing to note considering that it’s the first time he’s done so since trial 4, when he was questioning that idea. That ended with him being convinced that Shuichi was stronger than him and didn’t need his support and therefore wasn’t his sidekick any more. But now Kaito’s back to calling Shuichi that, even though he’s also still fully acknowledging that Shuichi’s more awesome than him – so it seems Kaito really does understand now that despite being the bigger hero, Shuichi can still benefit from his help, if only a little. That’s so good! That’s exactly the kind of thing that it always was, even when Kaito didn’t believe it. Heroes are not flawless and invincible and are allowed to need support too.

(It’s… a lot less clear whether Kaito has properly realised that that also applies to himself. He might have done, but the fact that he’s also somewhat separately convinced himself that his suffering is irrelevant means he’d never ask for help at this stage anyway, even if he had realised that doing so wouldn’t make him less of a hero.)

Shuichi: “Wh-Why…? If you knew I’d see through it, why—”

Maki: “If you knew it was pointless from the start, then you shouldn’t have gone that far…!”

Kaito: “Nah, it wasn’t pointless. It ended up being a huge success.”

Himiko: “Why?”

Kaito: “Because of this plan and Kokichi pretending to be the mastermind… We got closer to the true mastermind’s lair…”

While honestly I think Kaito is so stubborn and determined that he’d have gone through with the plan just for the sake of trying, for the tiniest chance of success, that isn’t all. He is not just lying to make everyone feel better when he says it succeeded anyway, because he very much did succeed in proving that Monokuma can’t get away with breaking the rules and so there has to be an audience. That was a fact nobody knew before this trial, but they’re sure of it now, thanks to Kaito’s efforts, and that’s something Kaito was always aiming for here.

Kaito: “Behind this truth, there’s gotta be a hint that leads to the real truth.”

And Kaito knows that Shuichi can use that fact to reach the “something beyond the truth” that he was telling him about yesterday through the window – the idea that maybe what they saw outside somehow isn’t the whole truth and there’s somewhere out there for them to escape to. Proving there’s an audience proves that, after all. Kaito managed to turn his completely baseless desperate optimism into something actually concrete, thanks to this plan.

Shuichi: “The real truth?”

Kaito: “Yeah, no doubt. That’s why Kokichi gave his life.”

This line almost sounds like Kokichi also cared about proving to everyone that there was an audience so that they could have hope, to the point that he gave up his life for it. But that doesn’t make any sense – if Kokichi cared about letting everyone know there was an audience, he could have just told them why he was so sure about it from the beginning, and definitely not perpetuate the lie that the outside world was dead. Presumably what Kaito really means here is that Kokichi was sure there was something beyond the apparent truth and therefore he was sure enough of the premise his plan relied on that he was willing to give his life for it. After all, it’d be a huge risk to give your life for a plan when the very premise it hinges on might be flawed from the outset.

Keebo: “You talk as if… he was your partner. When you hated him so strongly before…”

Kaito: “Oh, I hate his guts. Honestly, I’m still pissed off at him. He made us go through so much crap. To the end – no, even beyond that. He was a lying sack of shit.”

Kaito is not pulling his punches. He’s about to recount the last words Kokichi said to him, which was the closest Kokichi ever got to showing anyone how he really felt – but even though Kaito knows about that side of Kokichi now and understands him better than ever before, that doesn’t change the fact that Kokichi was a really shitty person. He still killed two people and made everyone suffer immensely for what was ultimately just a tiny part of his grand plan, and he was never willing to admit to any regret or remorse for doing so. And there is still no indication that his plan was for anything other than his own petty revenge and self-satisfaction. Kaito knows for sure now that Kokichi was definitely suffering like the rest of them and was therefore pitiable – but the awful way he dealt with that and hurt others in doing so makes him entirely deserving of everything Kaito’s saying about him here.

Kaito: “Hey, can I ask one thing? You want to ruin this killing game, but… You kept saying how fun this game was.”

I wouldn’t be surprised if Kaito already had a pretty good idea of what the answer to this question was going to be. He spent all of this chapter not being convinced by the evil sadist line, after all, and now upon seeing the lengths Kokichi was willing to go to to ruin the game, he probably already had a pretty good hunch as to what was up. He was just asking because he was hoping that here, at the very end, Kokichi might actually admit it.

(It’s notable the way Kaito asks if he can ask, which isn’t something Kaito usually does given how straightforward he is. It’s like he knows that what he’s asking is something deeply personal to Kokichi and there’s still every chance he might refuse to answer. Kaito’s really just asking Kokichi to finally be honest with him.)

Kokichi: “That was a lie… obviously…”

I like how he says “obviously” here. It’s the complete opposite of what he’s been saying this whole time that obviously this game is loads of fun and he’s enjoying it immensely. But now he’s actually tapping into how he’s really felt about it deep down this whole time, and he’s hated it so much that obviously any claim to the contrary was a lie, how could it have possibly been the truth?

Kokichi: “H-How could a game… that you’re forced to play… be fun…?”

So, okay, in Japanese this line instead says “How could a game where you kill people be fun?”. But I really don’t think it’s that huge of a deal that it was changed. It should already be clear from the way he’s been acting here and the fact that he hates the killing game that Kokichi never actually enjoyed people being killed and his claim at the end of trial 4 was a lie. He doesn’t need to explicitly say so to make that apparent. Meanwhile, the idea of hating being forced into this game is also in line with Kokichi’s character, because he hates not being in control and the idea that things aren’t on his terms, which is why he tried to take control of it and force Monokuma into playing his game this trial. That might be something that the localisers decided it actually made more sense for Kokichi to mention here, since hating killing people should be so obvious that he shouldn’t feel the need to say so, and so they changed it to something which was a bit more specific and nuanced. More on this when we get to that one other localisation-changed line regarding Kokichi in chapter 6.

(It’s also possible that this line is just a genuine mistranslation, because the verb used for “kill” in Japanese there is spelled the same as a verb for “do”. I’m not sure how much the rest of the sentence’s context makes the meaning clear, as my Japanese is patchy, but I think it’s at least vaguely possible that the localiser just thought they were directly translating the line here. I may be wrong, but I feel like that’s worth mentioning.)

Kokichi: “I had to think this game was fun to survive! I had to lie to myself!”

Everyone else who’s survived so far didn’t have to tell themselves they were enjoying this in order to stay alive. What Kokichi really means is that he had to lie to himself to continue functioning and not be a broken, terrified, paranoid mess. But maybe he thinks that such a broken mess would be a clear target for any evil backstabber looking to prey on the weak (totally the kind of person this game has been full of, right), which is exactly why he tells himself that this was obviously for the sake of his survival.

Kaito: “You little…”

This sounds like Kaito being frustrated and exasperated upon realising that Kokichi’s behaviour that caused everyone so much annoyance and pain was all a huge defence mechanism to selfishly protect himself and hide his weakness. There are so many better ways Kokichi could have dealt with things if he really was that scared all along – reaching out to everybody for help, working together with them to end the killing game in a way that actually benefitted everyone else too and didn’t throw people’s lives away in the process. But of course, his massive trust issues got in the way, very much like how Miu’s did. I think Kaito is realising here that things could so easily have been different if only Kokichi wasn’t so thoroughly messed up.

(I guess this is also at least a little bit similar to how things could have been very different for Kaito and he might have survived if he hadn’t had so many of his own issues and been doing everything he could to hide his weaknesses from everyone. They’re still total opposites in why they were hiding everything, of course.)

Kokichi: “The bastards who created this game to toy with our lives… and the shits enjoying it… They all… piss me off! Th-That’s why… I’m willing to do whatever it takes… to end this game!”

This is all very, very genuine – but apparently Kokichi managed to keep himself oblivious to the idea that he just gave those people he hates so much the best damn time of their lives by creating two such entertaining cases like he did. It would have been so, so much better for his purposes to just actually work together with everyone in escaping and end the game in a boring way like that. But that would have involved trusting people, and that wouldn’t have counted as winning the game on his own terms as the perfect revenge, and it wouldn’t have been something he’d have been able to convince himself he was totally having fun with as part of that defence mechanism he was so, so desperate to keep up.

Maki: “Kokichi said… that?”

Kaito: “That coulda been a lie, too. He probably just said it so that I’d cooperate with him.”

I don’t believe that Kaito really thinks it was a lie. He’s good enough at reading people that I’m sure his intuition is telling him that was the real Kokichi there, especially since he never believed the evil sadist claim in the first place. I guess he just doesn’t want to draw a firm conclusion while telling everyone else about it when it’s still just one of his hunches, and so he wants to remind them all that it’s possible Kokichi was lying and let them come to their own decisions.

Shuichi: (A lie… or the truth? Even now at the end, I don’t really understand Kokichi… But maybe that’s what lying is all about. The truth is in the eye of the beholder, huh? Kokichi… was the very embodiment of a lie.)

The writing makes a pretty overt point through Shuichi here that this is what Kokichi’s narrative purpose was. I’ve complained a lot about the way Kokichi has no concrete backstory to explain why he is the way he is, but I do realise that the reason they made him so ambiguous was in order to make this narrative point here. That said, I still wish he wasn’t that way. I’m not saying he’s a bad character, but Kokichi would have been a better character than he is if the writers had treated him as a character first before they treated him as a narrative device whose purpose is to be impenetrable.

I get the feeling that Kokichi was also a plot device before he was a character. His purpose in this story is to make that narrative point about lies, and to cause cases 4 and 5 to happen, and only after that is his purpose to be a character with his own consistent sense of psychology and motives. That’s why, even with all of his issues working to somewhat reasonably justify it, it’s still kind of a stretch that he went so far in murdering two people just for a tiny part of his plan, and then that he carried out the final part of his plan this chapter despite what should have been the glaringly obvious flaw in not using Shuichi as the accomplice, and that it never occurred to him that he simply shouldn’t have made these two entertaining cases at all. Because first and foremost, that’s how the plot was meant to go, and Kokichi’s character had to be stretched and squeezed into making him facilitate that plot. His ambiguity also helped the writers get away with that and make the somewhat forced nature of it harder to notice. It’s a shame, but the story of chapters 4 and 5 is so good, particularly in how it forms the core of Kaito’s character arc, so I’m really not complaining all that much that Kokichi’s character had to be put second to that.

---

[Next post]

#danganronpa #danganronpa v3 #drv3 #ndrv3 #chapter 5 #class trial #commentary

8 notes · View notes

firstpuffin · 6 years ago

Text

The infuriating politics behind Captain Marvel (2019) [with spoilers]

I watched Captain Marvel the morning of writing this and to make things clear: I liked it. It was fun, I enjoyed her character (which I’ll expand on earlier) and best of all it wasn’t in-your-face feminist propaganda. I call myself apolitical, the “a-“ prefix meaning “not” so I am “not political”. I’m not a feminist because there is modern baggage behind that word and there are very few labels that I actually subscribe to. The ones I do usually have the “a-“ prefix, so that probably says a lot about me.

I hate that I have to bring this up but people, including people whose opinions I generally respect, can’t see past the politics of a situation. I’m not not a feminist because I don’t believe in the cause; I do. I’m not some kind of red pill manist or whatever they are called, because I’m comfortable in myself. I’m apolitical because I see the content first and the agenda second. And Captain Marvel has good content.

Yes there are issues. I wouldn’t be me if I didn’t find problems with fiction. Where did Mar-vell get the Tesseract after Stark found it in the sea? Why did only Carol get powers from the explosion and not the others who were there? And it most definitely had the Marvel Cinematic Universe’s villain problem.

To make it clear this article is not about the film, it’s about people whose reviews repeatedly talk about the freaking patriarchy. Such as yes, Jude Law’s character is revealed to be a part of the conspiracy to suppress her true self. As a man he is clearly oppressing our female hero-

Or maybe he’s just a bad guy. You know, the bad guy. The villain. And we all know that if he had been a woman instead then the same people would claim there were too many women in the film thus feminist agenda. You know what has too many female characters? The Supergirl television show. But if you were to switch everybody’s sexes then it would look like an ordinary male-lead show. You could consider that as them pushing a bit too hard, but it is not only understandable but is also far from the worst part of that show.

So, our antagonist is suppressing the powers of our hero. Maybe that’s because as we see in the final part of the story (what is known as the Falling Action and is when the heroes turn things around) she is practically unstoppable. Maybe it’s because they are trying to use her. Maybe it’s because he shot her out of the sky six years ago and is responsible for the death of the person she admires most and is possibly the person who wiped her memory. Maybe it’s not patriarchy but assholery.

I started watching one review that said it was bad because it didn’t follow the Hero’s Journey, an old method of story-telling that he claimed is essential to a good story (which it isn’t, especially in our post-modern age) and while it seemed to follow it at the beginning it quickly departed. How? Well the mentor character (Jude Law again) wasn’t actually a mentor character, he just pretended to be one. Except he was a mentor, but the twist (admittedly a predictable one) was that he was a villain. And if you think that doesn’t count, then look at it this way: he’s training her to be a bad guy too. So he’s still a mentor.

And he claimed that there was no “call to action”, which is the reason why the hero ventures out to adventure, saying that she was just “sent on a mission”. And yes, that wasn’t a call to action (except maybe in the most literal sense), the call to action comes later when she discovered hints about her past and found out that everything was in danger if she, the only person in the position to do so, didn’t help; by which I mean she was the only member of her organisation on Earth for the next day. If galactic danger and self-discovery aren’t calls to action then just what is it that motivates most stories?

So clearly this guy wanted to dislike the film. I stopped watching less than half way through his video after he said patriarchy for the fifth time. Like, shut up about it already.

The next complaint that I’m going to cover is that apparently only boys like comics and so a strong female character is off-putting? I’m not sure, this guy confused me. Yes, comics were (and possibly still are; I don’t check demographics) aimed at young teenage boys, hence the silly action and terrifyingly bombastic female figures (like seriously, those proportions would be fatal). But you know what I like? To use my own terminology, capable characters.

I don’t use “strong” as an adjective without purpose because it has connotations of physical power, which isn’t what is meant by “strong female characters”. I use capable because I feel it is a better fit. Carol Danvers is capable, strong and generally badass anyway. Why? Well for one thing, she always gets back up. You know, that thing that Captain America always does? That is important to his character? She does it too, and it is hinted at all throughout the film so it isn’t just some cheap “drama” for the climax.

I’m going to go full nerd here and talk about anime. My favourite characters in the action genre have always been those who stand back up. They get beaten down (physically or mentally) and force themselves back up. It’s cheesy as all hell and it is done in anime better than I usually see in western comics or films and stuff. It’s cool, it’s dramatic and it works really well at getting you to root for the hero.

Many people probably know of Dragon Ball Z and we see it in Goku, the hero of that series. I’d also like to point out that when it comes to raw power, the Dragon Ball fighters are similar yet stronger than Captain Marvel. A character in the series who is less frequently called “strong” is Bulma. She isn’t a fighter and she doesn’t have all of the superpowers of Goku or the others, but she’s a scientist who often provides support. More than that though, she never lets her lack of planet-destroying power prevent her from standing side by side with the fighters. Heck, she stands up to literal gods when they piss her off.

She is what I think of as a capable female character, because she can’t kick ass but that doesn’t make her weak.

Growing up, Carol Danvers is obviously what we call a “tomboy”. She wants to do what the boys do and she pushes herself to do so, despite being condescended to regularly for it. She literally gets knocked down, she falls and she (again literally) crashes and she gets back up. Even more impressive for me is that she is mentally and emotionally shaken, but stands up again to protect others and to regain control of her life.

And there is nothing in that above paragraph that is uniquely masculine.

A girl can fall over and stand back up. A woman can be emotionally manipulated only to pick herself back up. And because they aren’t masculine actions, seeing a female character do so isn’t at all feminism. It’s just a person doing what a person does.

So, what else? Well there are complaints about her character being “snarky” or her being a bad loser (she is beaten in a sparring match and lashes out). Except I loved seeing her cocky mannerisms (which are common in male action heroes) and her obvious pleasure to be doing something, because it’s pretty clear that they haven’t let her do anything but train for the last six years. And this isn’t patriarchy again, she is in a military group with strict guidelines on when you are ready to go into the field (plus as we know, they are scared of her power).

She was bored, she was restless. She’s a character who obviously like to act, being held back. That’s why she lashed out; she was frustrated and angry at not doing anything and yes, it could be seen as a flaw. But it’s a humanising and understandable flaw if you just try to empathise with her instead of looking for things to dislike. And one last point, Jude Law’s character said that if she couldn’t control her power then she’d have to visit the Supreme Intelligence(SI), who is a sort of commanding officer (I don’t know the terminology). So what does Danvers do? She uses it. It is not a stretch at all to suppose that she may have intentionally lashed out so that she could confront the SI. Plus, they are all something that we see again and again in male action heroes.

Yes, I keep comparing her to male action heroes and that’s because she is also an action hero. They will have similar traits regardless of sex or gender. She is confident and willing to have a laugh and it is great to see.

And finally, and this may come across badly but hear me out first, I loved seeing her smile. I don’t mean that in the “give us a smile, love”, but in the “she’s excited” way. I love to see people excited and when she’s about to go on a mission or when she’s figuring out her powers towards the end, she is clearly having fun.

I’d love to see that in a male character too, it doesn’t matter. Seeing action heroes excited to do what they do, is great. Again, that’s something we see a lot in anime so it’s no surprise that I like seeing it here.

This has run longer than I intended so, to conclude: Captain Marvel is an action hero who is frustrated from doing nothing for six years and when she gets the chance, she acts. She is driven, her power is suppressed and she is oh-so clearly a good person. Oh, and she’s confident, which I suspect is a big problem for those who are not used to seeing it.

-Note= I found it interesting that according to the dictionaries I looked at, bombastic means flowery or pretentious language; think of people who use excessively complex language. But as soon as you look at how people use the word (including but not limited to Urban Dictionary) you see that is not only how people use the word. Language is fascinating.

-Note= Releasing these every two weeks isn’t working, I can’t keep it in mind and so I keep missing the upload date. Instead I’m considering releasing a short 500 word-ish between uploads, just to keep myself from slipping.

#first puffin #captain marvel #marvel #movie #opinion #agenda #feminism #thosetagswilldofornow

4 notes · View notes

fyrapartnersearch · 7 years ago

Text

Villain Enthusiast Seeks Same

Hello! I’m Autumn. I’m an almost-30-something currently in GMT + 5:45. The breakdown is I'm halfway around the world doing volunteer work for the summer and I'm feeling pretty isolated, so I figure burying myself in a roleplay would be a good distraction.

What I’m Looking For: You have to be 18+ and preferably close to my age.

I’m looking for a partner(s) who has an appreciation for villainous characters, both playing them (must) and playing against them (would be nice). Beyond that, I’m looking for someone who appreciates the necessity of conflict to move the roleplay forward, and who is both generally active but also understands that real life takes precedent! It would be great to find all of that wrapped up in someone who wants to also get to know one another OOC. I’m a chatty and hopefully funny person, and I do my best (or worst, if you’re one of my hapless OCs…) brainstorming/idea bouncing in an informal setting where I feel comfortable.

Basically, I work hard, I play hard, and I’m down for some awesome wicked villainy. Let’s do this.

Availability: I'm online every day, but be patient with me. WIFI isn't great out here and I have work to do while I'm abroad.

The Basics: I’m a para/multi-para roleplayer, though I do not give a flying fuck about word count. My metrics for determining quality are a response which 1) satisfyingly responds to what my partner has written and 2) introduces a new element for my partner to respond to. I’m “literate,” but I care way more about your ideas than whether or not you use an Oxford comma.

I play characters of all genders, and all pairings. In an ideal world, you would as well, but my bare minimum is that you are comfortable playing either M or NB in an M or NBxF pairing. I am able to play as many characters as needed for the roleplay, depending on how ambitious it is, and ask that you are able to play at least two characters.

I only play OCs. I prefer if we make our own world, but I’m open to playing against canon characters/in established worlds, provided the fandom in question is aligned with my roleplay interests (see below) and I’m either familiar with or don’t need more than a passing knowledge of the fandom to roleplay competently.

Properties I have more than a passing familiarity with: A:TLA/LoK, Game of Thrones (show), OUAT, Harry Dresden, The Grishaverse, Vlad Taltos/Dragaera, American Gothic (‘97 TV show), John Dies at the End, Alien/Prometheus, Marvel (films), X-Men (films), Batman (films), True Blood, TVD, BTVS, Hellsing, Pokemon (first gen), SCP Foundation, Area X/Southern Reach Trilogy, Inuyasha

Format: Email or kik are going to work best for me, since when I can't get Wifi I have a data plan that is very text friendly, and very hostile to anything else (so Tumblr is not great unfortunately)

Interests: Genre-wise, I comfortably occupy the realm of speculative fiction, and everything within it. I’ve done space opera, steampunk, swords and sorcery, urban fantasy, post-apocalyptic, magical realism, parallel dimensions, horror, etc. I love it all, if I’m with the right partner. To that end, I love in-depth world building and all that entails.

As mentioned before, I adore a good villain. I write the kind of villains where “Lux Aeterna” may as well start playing when they enter the room, because you just know something awful (but epic) is about to happen. I’m looking for someone who brings the same enthusiasm to the table. Ideally, we'd be doubling in a situation where we each play the respective villains to one another's hero(ines), but if you only want to 1x1 it would be you (villain--any gender) x me (heroine).

Vampires. Unrepentant, bloodsucking vampires. Incomprehensible, ancient vampires. Did I mention vampires? Overpowered villains. Heroes triumphing based on smarts and hard work, rather than strength. Unresolved sexual tension (particularly between a virtuous character and an irredeemable one). Mindfuckery. Detailed world building. The slow corruption of the heroic types. Twisted fairy tales. Psychological horror. Intricate magical systems. Alien/fantasy species with non-western moral codes/values/culture. The absurd. Fatal flaws.

Content: I’m no stranger to roleplaying scenes of abuse, trauma, or physical or psychological torture. You don’t need to be as open to this type of content as I am, but if all “dark” content is off the table, we aren’t a good match.

Smut: For the most part, I’m disinterested in smut. I’m far more interested in the foreplay and the psychology of the event, than the mechanics of it. I strongly prefer fade to black, but if you're the otherwise perfect partner whose only concession is asking for an occasional smut scene, I'm happy to oblige.

Limits: The short list is bodily excretions/fluids, and pedophilia.

Samples. tw: murder, blood, mindfuckery, dissociation, that kind of stuff. These are actual roleplay responses, not self-paras or drabbles or excerpts from my novel, so you may have to infer context.

If you actually read all of this and it sounds like a grand ol’ horrorshow to you, please contact me below:

kik: fallrps

tumblr: @fallrps (slowest response rate due to limited Tumblr access)

email: [email protected]

#indie rp #indie roleplay #independent roleplay #oc rp #para #semipara #short term #long term #email #messenger #tumblr #submission

2 notes · View notes

notbemoved-blog · 4 years ago

Text

Books, Books, Books

Lists are all the rage at the end of any year and this plague year is no exception. Since I’ve read a fair number of books by friends this past year or so, I thought I’d send out my “Goodreads” reviews of all three books that I’ve enjoyed with the hope of giving each a bit more recognition (and perhaps a bump in sales) in the New Year. The reviews are presented in the order that I reviewed them. All three books are available on Amazon or through your local independent bookstore. Also try IndieBound, the online independent bookseller.

[End of Year Note: My apologies for not being more active on social media lately. I’m working on my own follow up to “We Shall Not Be Moved” and have tried to stay away from all forms of distraction, including social media. With any luck, my next project, the story of the Tougaloo Nine Library Sit-In, will be on its way to the publisher at the end of 2021.]

And now, for our 2020 BOOKS, BOOKS, BOOKS!

Wave On: A Surfing Story by Michael E.C. Gery

(Amazon Digital Services, 2018, 432 pages, Autobiographical Fiction)

[Reviewed August 2019]

"A wonderfully adept stoner’s diary for the boomer generation."

I was thoroughly enchanted with “Wave On” from beginning to end. Even when I wasn’t sure exactly where we were going, the ride was exhilarating. Perhaps it was because I knew many of the places where the action takes place: Williamsburg, the Outer Banks, Annapolis, Ocean City, College Park, and even The Who concert back in 1971 [or was it ’70?] at Merriweather Post Pavilion, which I also happened to attend!! I read very little fiction but a fair amount of biography and memoir, and I must say that I rarely find a work of fiction that is as engaging and heart-driven as “Wave On.”

Part One is a pure, lovely, romantic love story that is contemporaneous with our early adulthood and, thus, easy for me to put myself in the shoes of Cro as he tries to navigate the strictures of young adulthood in a laissez-faire new world of the mid-1960s. The fact that he has been schooled at an Episcopalian Boys school and loves all of those old hymns and prayers makes it all the more real for me, having attended a 4-year Catholic high school seminary. Cro’s goofiness, uncertainty, and (initial) shyness around women also resonated.

What I loved about Part One is that Gery establishes a voice for Cro, the Narrator, that is immediate, engaging, alive, and consistent throughout the entire novelization of what I believe is Gery’s young adult life. (A new term I just picked up--“autofiction” i.e., autobiographical fiction--seems to apply here.) Cro is so normal in his struggles to understand how the world works, so honest in his mistakes, so in love with his environment—the ocean, the waves, the shore—that he makes us love them, too, perhaps a bit more than we already do. But it is that voice that intrigued me throughout. No matter what kind of scrape Cro and his interesting band of friends and lovers gets into, there is a confidence that they are up to the challenge. [I must admit that Cro’s drift during Part Two with regard to his professional aspirations and even his family life was a bit baffling, but I came to think that the weed had a lot to do with his lack of ambition and direction.]

Part Two, of course, gets a bit more complicated as real life intervenes and our little Love Couple begins to encounter troubles from within and without. I hated to see that and was certain that Cro was going to lose his wonderful Ella and Adam and couldn’t see my way through to how it all might resolve, particularly when Maryanne enters the picture and the Neil Young Concert kiss betrays a problematic (if not fatal) flaw in our hero. But I suffered through all of that, wanting to see how it all came out in the end. Although there was no deus ex machina, the surprising turn of events that helps resolve these dramatic arcs is shocking yet consistent. It all made narrative sense and helped explain why we were taken on so many to such a happy ending.

“Wave On” is a wonderfully adept stoner’s diary for our boomer generation. I can’t wait for Gery’s next work of autofiction to continue the journey with him.

Hard Road South by Scott Gates

(Blue Ink Press, 2020, 254 pages, Fiction)

[Reviewed, May 2020]

“A little jewel box of a novel.”

“Hard Road South” is a little jewel box of a novel set during the early days of Reconstruction Virginia. This beautifully rendered tale imagines a naïve Connecticut Yankee—a former Union soldier—who travels South to visit and potentially settle in some of the lush foothills of the Shenandoah Valley where he once engaged the Confederate “enemy”. Hoping to find peace while helping to reform a culture that wishes to be left alone, our hero, one Solomon Dykes, finds fast friends but also fast enemies amidst the verdant pastures of his would-be Old Virginny Home.

An early scene sets the tone: A down on her luck woman is stopped in the town of Middleburg—the place that would become the enclave of the likes of millionaires John and Jackie Kennedy and Jack Kemp Cooke a century later—by some Union soldiers still on the scene occupying this “foreign” land to ensure compliance with Union directives. Her transgression? Wearing the Confederate uniform jacket of her dead husband. The three Confederate buttons on the jacket must be removed or she will be arrested and charged with treason. Such is the over-reach of conquering heroes.

Our damsel in distress is aided by the swift thinking of one Jeb Mosby, a local farmer, who pulls out his knife and gently removes the buttons so as to spare his life-long neighbor the embarrassment of arrest. “Such was life now,” Mosby observes. “Filled with reminders—small as they may seem—that life would not soon be returning to how he’d left it before the war.” It is small observations such as this that gives this book its charm and its weight. Representations of what life must have been like for the conquered South are constant reminders that the likes of Solomon Dykes were not at all welcome and most likely would be rebuffed should the opportunity arise. Scott Gates is new to novel writing, but you wouldn’t know it from his sharp eye for detail and his pacing. Gates gives his story and his characters plenty of room to breathe and develop while providing the reader with glimpses of the specifics of their war-torn lives. A Southerner by birth, Gates offers a sensibility of one trying to bridge the great divide while not shying away from the difficulties building that bridge might require. This is a tale for our time, as well, as our nation is once again fraught with deep divisions perhaps not seen since the ending of that great Civil War more than 150 years ago. We are stuck and unable to move forward until some fundamental rift gets settled. “Hard Road South” is a highly readable, thoroughly enjoyable yet cautionary tale for our time. Perhaps we can learn from the past and this time get things right. Perhaps …

Small Business Big Heart: How One Family Redefined the Bottom Line by Paul Wesslund

(Highway 61 Communications, 2020, 242 pages, Nonfiction)

[Reviewed, August 2020]

“Big-hearted Book Teaches That Care for Others = Good Business”

In the midst of a global health crisis—the worst we’ve seen in generations—and while we struggle as a country, as a people, to find our footing morally and culturally during a reductio ad absurdum political creep show, Small Business BIG HEART lands as a corrective, a balm to soothe frayed nerves and intemperate minds. That is not to say that this big-hearted book is pablum. No, the stories it brings are all too real—people who often have lost their way through drugs, alcohol, and bad choices; refugees who have fled horrific circumstances and are looking only to start a new life but can’t due to the stigma of being different; and one family in particular that is faced with its own dissolution as well as the loss of its dream of a thriving family business. The high-stakes rollercoaster ride that journalist Paul Wesslund takes us on is dizzying not only for its incredible highs and sometimes tragic lows, but also because it introduces a concept too often forgotten … no, disregarded … in modern business life—what corporate governance experts would call “the duty of CARE.”

Sal and Cindy Rubino are two hard-working business owners who, through the course of their trials and tribulations, manage to hold on to the dream of a creating their own business from scratch while also enduring the inevitable personal strains that such a dream exacts. The two met and fell in love while working toward Hospitality Management business degrees in Miami, but the real story starts when they try and apply the lessons of their training in the difficult day-to-day drudgery of actually running their own restaurant—simply named “The Café”—in an offbeat, run-down section of Louisville, Cindy’s hometown. It is here that their skills and wills are tested to the limits and each will have to adjust their visions to fit the realities not explored in textbooks. And it is here that their hearts will be broken, and then opened to the truths that adaptability and innovation can be applied not only to recipes and business models, but to the very people you employ and the methods you use to build a team for success.

Along the way, we meet all manner of broken individuals. The restaurant business is notorious for laying waste to lives due to its thankless dawn-to-dusk hours and the constant requirement to please the customer at all costs. Wesslund has an expert’s eye for the telling detail and the wrenching story line. [I found myself tearing up at any number of stories throughout this engaging, nonfiction tale.] His twenty years as editor-in-chief of Kentucky Living, the largest circulation monthly magazine within the state, shows in the well-drawn portraits of individuals from as far away as Bhutan and as near as Pricilla’s Place, a half-way house just a few blocks from the Caf��, where Cindy and Sal would find some of their best employees. Perhaps Wesslund’s (not to mention the Rubinos’) refusal to judge people by the standards of upwardly mobile middle-class values but instead, with extraordinary discernment, to look deeper into their souls to spot their special sparks and unique talents is the hallmark of this extraordinary book.

It is rare outside of evangelical circles to find a book that so openly espouses Christian principles, but Sal and Cindy make no bones about the fact that their faith community helped to save their marriage as well as their business, and Wesslund recounts the strength of those relationships and the power of religious inspiration with rare delicacy. Yet the book is not all seriousness and drama. We get, of all things, recipes (!) at the start of nearly every chapter—a creative way of introducing a new topic or the next development of this constantly churning story. And we are introduced to Cindy’s creative cooking style, to Sal’s winning smile and to their gracious, open approach to hospitality.

Small Business BIG HEART runs the gamut of the small business life cycle. It is a soup-to-nuts (literally) primer on the ups and downs of small business management. As such, it is tough medicine for anyone daring to think of creating their own start-up. Given that, however, it provides a deeply affecting microcosm of how we as a society—as a culture—might live if we, indeed, saw everyone we encountered as a member of our own family. It does not skimp on the tough decisions that must be made to keep a business afloat—the “tension between compassion and the bottom line”—but it provides a template on how to “run a business with heart”—where everyone can be a winner.

Wishing you a New Year full of new books, new ideas, new opportunities, new promise.

#Michael Gery #Wave On: A Surfing Story #Scott Gates #Hard Road South #Paul Wesslund #Small Business Big Heart #Top Books of 2020

0 notes

kattaloop · 7 years ago

Text

Why Lexa? Because It’s Lexa!

Stories have the power to change the world. As Dustin Lance-Black so eloquently put, “telling stories is one of the most potent skills in changing culture, because it starts with changing hearts.” It does not matter if those stories are real or fictional. Good storytelling will draw you in and make you feel. You won’t have to look very far for writers who will attest to ugly sobbing or feeling elated while writing a story, even. We are supposed to feel, and the more empathetic you are, the more you become emotionally attached. It is not unusual or even abnormal to feel a real connection with fictional characters. Can you fall in love with a fictional character? Of course you can. Just like you can fall in love with the idea (or rather an ideal) of an actual person, a common problem in many relationships. Can you grieve and mourn a fictional character? Absolutely yes, and there is nothing wrong with it or wrong with you.

The 100 is like any other story, in that it has the potential to change hearts and minds, for better or for worse. That is part of the responsibility of every creator, and they are fools if they claim otherwise. It may not reach millions and millions of people, but the hundreds of thousands it does will take away a message and, unfortunately for those of us who are progressive and part of a minority, that message has turned from a positive to a negative in its third season. I will, without a doubt, take another look at its fall from grace another time, but as someone who instantly connected with Lexa, it was bad news all around.

From the moment Lexa first appeared on screen, as the timid servant girl transformed into the powerful Commander of the 12 Clans, I was spellbound. With little screen time or initial purpose, the writers perhaps unknowingly gave Alycia Debnam-Carey just enough good material to work with to make this minor character larger and compelling than anything else on the show. She became, as show creator Jason Rothenberg put it, “an internet sensation.” I watched her reveal layer after layer, nuance after nuance, dark secrets and stories yet to be unveiled, emotions boiling underneath a stoic surface - and then the kiss between Lexa and Clarke happened and I swear I have never seen anything more beautiful on screen. I had been questioning my sexuality for a while, but in that moment I knew that I identified, in fact, LGBT.

Does Lexa mean so much to me because she is gay? Nope. And sorry, not sorry if that does not correlate with anyone’s limited view of the world. Lexa is gay, yes, and that means something, a lot, and I’ll come to that in a moment, but Lexa is so much more. Which, in my opinion, is the reason why she had and continues to have such a tremendous impact on people, why she crossed the boundaries into mainstream media and attention so effortlessly, why she became so incredibly important both as a character and as a symbol. Because, oh boy, did she become a symbol after her death.

Viewers from all walks of life connected with Lexa on different levels. All of her layers, which we have not even seen half of, in my opinion, offer points of connection, of attachment. Heck, even the haters cannot get enough of her, blindly latching on to her flaws, to the point of demonizing her, which becomes an issue because that truly is not her and skims along a damaging stereotype as the writers only continue to give more fodder to, rather than contradict those problematic viewpoints. Either way, Lexa calls to your emotions like hardly any other character I have seen, and you are still asking, why Lexa?

If you consider yourself part of the LGBT community, you quickly learn that you are part of a minority. But just like with any other minority, circumstances differ for everyone. I had to learn that myself as I dipped my toe in for the first time. I never talked to my parents about my sexuality in any capacity, and they never cared either way. I guess I can count myself lucky in that regard, because I have since learned that too many LGBT, male or female or fluent, feel the need to continue to hide their true selves from their families even throughout adulthood or worse, fear and suffer the consequences of loving someone they do not approve of and in turn will reject their own. Imagine living in fear of your own father’s reaction to who you are and who you love, only to see Lexa’s father figure being the one to shoot her because she allowed herself to love again, to love Clarke. It is not poetic, Jason, it is just cruel and disgusting.

Finding representation at all, never mind good representation, on screen for LGBT is not easy. We cannot just switch the channel to see another Commander Lexa or a loving relationship between two female leaders. Much of the representation is flawed, if not harmful, as it is riddled with stereotypes, or sidelined, or a plot device, or the bait to draw in LGBT viewers. Lexa and Clarke, for a while, were amazing representation. They were groundbreaking and truly could have been a game-changer, if not for Rothenberg’s ignorance. Or was it arrogance? Something more nefarious? I will let you be the judge of that.

Why is representation so important? Remember, it is the story that can change the hearts and minds of people, which in turn can change our culture, our society, our world. As long as we continue to see POCs executed reminiscent of the slavery era, women propping up men for their redemption arc while sacrificing their own character development, bisexual females more often than not ending up with the male hero, and lesbians killed within the context of love is weakness, being undeserving of love and not having any chance at being happy whatsoever - as long as that is the message viewers see on screen, prejudice and fear will continue to reign over love and compassion.

Why does it have to be Lexa, why won’t I move on to another lesbian character? Because it was never about the lesbian character. It is about Lexa, who also, gloriously (which apparently corresponds with fatally), happens to be gay. The world is not black and white. Lexa is not either this or that. She is special, a fantastically complex and multilayered character we do not see very often, if at all. My heart bleeds at the thought that we might never see her full potential because of one ignorant creator, lacking both creative skills and any sense of responsibility.

If I ever were to blame Alycia (which I am not) for anything, it would be that she is too damn good at what she does. She made us fall in love with this outstanding character, she gave her depth and emotions that far surpassed anything written on the page, and gave her the humanity to make her utterly real. Unfortunately, Lexa and Alycia both were at the mercy of Rothenberg who, as far as I can tell, has no empathy or awareness or an ounce of compassion and no creative vision past his admittedly humongous ego. But none of that, no time or financial constrictions could excuse his decision to kill off this one in a million character with a homophobic trope, without giving everyone, himself included, the chance to have her back at some point.

Lexa means the world to me and to so many others, she is as real as she is fictional, and that’s that. Her story has the power to change hearts, and that is why she is worth more alive than dead. As she is, indeed, a fictional character, there are multitudes of ways to rewrite her fate, to bring her back to us, if Alycia is willing. Because it should be crystal clear by now that Alycia gave us Lexa, not Rothenberg.

Ai gonplei nou ste odon!

#lexa #clexa #commander lexa #the100 #may we meet again #lexaspinoff #alycia debnam carey #jason rothenberg #lgbt #representation matters #reflection #i might turn this into an article #i miss lexa

15 notes · View notes

studyinglogic · 8 years ago

Text

Lessons from the Three Kingdoms (or, on not succeeding despite doing your best)

One of my favourite books of all time is The Romance of the Three Kingdoms. It is, to my knowledge, unique in world literature. Dealing with the struggle for power between three powers after the fall of the Han dynasty, it has a vast tapestry of characters, covers the rise and fall of three different nations, and deals with themes spanning from loyalty and right conduct to the role of fate in human lives.

So far, that’s nothing special - there are many other epics like that. Where Three Kingdoms is different lies in the lovingly detailed strategies scattered throughout the whole book. As you’d expect of a book about three nations contending for power, there are battles throughout the entire book. There are strategists plotting these battles. And their plots and counter-plots are painstakingly described, so that you can see why the battles turn out the way they do.

This focus on strategies makes the Three Kingdoms unique. One might think of it as a piece of proto-rational fiction. There are bits which don’t fit with that idea - for example, in Chapter 36, Tan Fu manages to predict that there will be an attack on the camp from a whirlwind passing by. But cases like that are few and far between. (The closest equivalent to Three Kingdoms that I know of is Legend of the Galactic Heroes.)

Having said that, my favourite lesson from Three Kingdoms is not the importance of strategising, but about failure despite trying your best. This is shown via the character of Zhuge Liang, the brilliant strategist of the Shu Han kingdom. His story goes like this: I use the Brewitt-Taylor translation

Liu Bei, ruler of Shu and the legitimate heir to the Han dynasty, seeks Zhuge Liang out. He knows Zhuge is a commander without peer; Zhuge finally agrees to go with him. Before Zhuge leaves with Liu Bei (in chapter 38), he tells his brother, “Keep up the farm in my absence and do not let the place go to ruin. As soon as my work is accomplished, I will certainly return.”

Over the course of the story, Zhuge shows himself to be a man of many talents. He is able to control the wind (at Red Cliff), is an expert on engineering (he makes an automatic crossbow), and manages to plan against his enemies with almost superhuman insight. (In game theory terms, he is an expert at level-k reasoning, and his opponents are always at level k-1). This goes so far as to make Mao Tsung-kang comment in his essay “How to Read The Romance of the Three Kingdoms” (in Rolston’s edited volume How to Read the Chinese Novel, p. 157), “[Zhuge Liang is] so unfathomable in his designs as to make you doubt whether he is not a demon or a god.”

Above all, he is loyal, working unceasingly for the Shu Han empire. On Liu Bei’s deathbed (in chapter 85), he tells Zhuge Liang, “If my son can be helped, help him. But if he prove[s to be] a fool then take the throne yourself.” Zhuge Liang, shocked by the extent of Liu Bei’s trust in him, swears to support Liu Bei’s son until death.

Zhuge Liang continues to do battle, facing off against his rival Sima Yi many times over many campaigns. Sima Yi is not quite Zhuge’s equal, but he is crafty and cunning; Zhuge is never able to corner him. Finally (in chapter 103), Zhuge manages to lure Sima Yi into a valley, blocks the entrance, and sets the entire hillside on fire. (There is no kill like overkill, as the trope goes.)

Zhuge Liang triumphs! Sima Yi is doomed! Or so it seems - it suddenly starts raining, Sima Yi escapes, and Zhuge’s trap is for naught. Zhuge himself sighs and says, “Man proposes; God disposes. We cannot wrest events to our will.”

The rain is significant, because it’s been earlier established that Zhuge is able to control (or at the very least, predict) the weather (as seen at Red Cliff). His plan going awry due to the weather shows that fate (or the Heavens, or the universe itself) is against him. He understands that he will never be able to restore the Han empire - not due to lack of effort, but simply because it’s not meant to happen.

This last realisation is too much. Zhuge has been fighting for a long time, and he is so very tired; he falls ill shortly after, and feels himself close to death. To discern his fate, he arranges seven lamps on the floor of his tent, with forty-nine smaller lamps surrounding them. In the middle is the master-lamp of his fate. If the master-lamp stays lit for seven days, he will live; if not, he will die.

The lamp stays lit for six days - and is knocked over by a clumsy soldier on the sixth night. “Life and death are foreordained; no prayers can alter them,” Zhuge comments. He passes on shortly after.

So it seems like Zhuge Liang’s life ends with the lesson that you can’t fight fate. Zhuge is brilliant and strives harder than anyone else, yet the fates decree that he cannot restore the Han empire. Zhuge Liang fails because there is no other option; that is his tragedy. He never returns to his farm.

But there’s a twist. The Shu kingdom eventually falls; Liu Bei’s son turns out to be a dissolute and incompetent ruler. After his surrender, he’s at a banquet (chapter 119) and behaving merrily, without regard to his lost kingdom or the sadness of his men. His captor, observing this, says, “The man lacks feeling. That is what has ruined him. Even if Zhuge Liang had lived, he could not have maintained such a man.”

So right at the end of the book, we’re presented with an alternative: maybe Zhuge Liang did have a way of averting that fate. Maybe he could have won the day - if only he was willing to take the throne, instead of serving (and being limited by) Liu Bei’s son.

If Zhuge was so capable, why didn’t he just take over the Shu Han? He could have, but he chose not to, out of his loyalty to Liu Bei. From this point of view, Zhuge’s failure looks more like that of a classical Greek tragedy: his fatal flaw is his loyalty and his principles. He fails because he refuses to compromise; his refusal to take power is what dooms the Shu Han.

What does Three Kingdoms end up saying about fate? It’s ambiguous. Maybe people have fates which cannot be changed. Maybe there’s no such thing.

But regardless of that, the lesson I learned was that people can try their very best and yet fail - just as Zhuge tries his best and fails. This is an obvious lesson, yet one that was hard for me to learn. It’s been said in many times and in many places. And I first caught a glimpse of that lesson from this book.

#rational fic #The Romance of the Three Kingdoms #Three Kingdoms #Romance of the Three Kingdoms #RoTK #Zhuge Liang #Liu Bei #commentary #literature #world literature #Chinese literature #personal

124 notes · View notes

drinkthehalo · 8 years ago

Text

Supernatural Season 12 - the Mary Winchester storyline

Of all the ridiculous things… I’ve fallen down the Supernatural rabbit hole.

Supernatural is the last fandom I’d have expected to sneak up on me. I stopped watching years ago and had been wishing that someone would put it out of its misery.

But then a few weeks ago, my friend mentioned that Sam and Dean’s mother was on the show as a regular character. It piqued my curiosity. A story that’s actually about the Winchester family, not the internal politics of Heaven or whatever random boring nonsense that caused me to stop watching?

So long story short - I was just in Shanghai (for the third time!) and when I wasn’t running around a dark hotel or drinking at a bar, I was waking up at 5am, jetlagged and half drunk, mainlining SPN. (Watching it in bed on my phone! Ha.)

To my complete shock, seasons 11 and 12 are GREAT. It's like the show took stock of everything it was doing wrong, remembered what had once made it awesome, and set about methodically fixing it.

If you are someone who also gave up on the show - watch 11x04 “Baby.” It made me laugh, made me cry, made me literally want to hug my television. It was such a gift to the audience, and a promise to do better. Proof that the show can still be absolutely wonderful when it puts in the effort.

Also, Dean Winchester. He’s one of the best fictional characters I’ve ever seen; he's so fucked up and he's also the most lovable thing ever. His combination of strength, fragility, competence, darkness, sweetness, silliness… His heroism and idealism and fatalism and self-abnegation… His joie de vivre, suicidal impulses, bitterness, weariness, ridiculousness and awkwardness… His badassery and heroism and codependence and tragedy.

Such a complex beautiful mess. Narratively, he is the gift that keeps on giving, the reason the show has lasted twelve years - you can just keep throwing stories at him and you get the most fascinating results.

I will be writing more about SPN. Sorry if you’re just here for the immersive theatre posts!

Here are my thoughts on the Mary Winchester storyline, which I LOVED -

It’s a complex, messy, fascinating story, where nobody is completely right and nobody is completely wrong, and you can sympathize with every character. It brings the show right back to the core of what made it good and interesting.

The three key things I loved about it:

I was pleasantly surprised at how it subverted my expectations

Mary herself was relatable, interesting, complex, and her choices raised intriguing ethical questions

Mary’s presence provided an opportunity to dive into the psychology and issues of Dean (especially) and Sam in a way we haven’t seen before

As soon as I heard that Mary was back, I was simultaneously afraid of the ways it could go wrong, and deeply intrigued by the possibilities it raised.

The most interesting thing the show had going on in its early days was the complexity of the boys’ relationship with their father. The success of Jeffrey Dean Morgan’s career was a tragedy for Supernatural - once he was gone it just never had the same emotional intensity, though they did interesting things with flashbacks and time travel and pseudo-father figures.

But Mary - Mary has that same intense emotional resonance. She was the first character we saw in the Pilot, Dean’s deepest wish (in arguably the best episode of the show, 2x20) and Dean’s Heaven (5x16), the key to Dean’s character.

"I know [my mother] wanted me to be brave. I think about that every day. And I do my best to be brave." - Dean from 1x03 - what an amazing through-line to a story still unfolding twelve years later!

But… Supernatural doesn’t have a great track record with female characters. The original sin of the show - the reason I’ve always been a bit ambivalent about loving it so much - is how it portrays women as symbols that matter only in relation to men. The Pilot is egregious. Mary and Jess, in their ridiculous frilly white nightgowns, dying as motivation for the men to embark on their quests. In Supernatural, men have journeys. Men are subjects, with destinies, and “work to do.” Men are multi-dimensional characters. Women are objects (in the early seasons - it’s gotten way better recently). We barely know Mary and Jess as characters, and don’t need to. Their deaths are not even about them; they’re about what they do to Sam and Dean.

Usually when Mary reappears in the show, it’s as a symbol, the embodiment of the ideal of motherhood. The love, safety, and care that Dean longs for. (Sam, interestingly, does not long for Mary the same way, both because he doesn’t remember her and because he had Dean as his mother figure. I have always adored that parallel, that Dean is like Mary and Sam is like John, which so subverts our expectations of how they present their gender roles, tough guy Dean and sensitive Sam.)

So my fear of season twelve was that we’d still see Mary a symbol. And THANK GOD they were smart enough to completely subvert that expectation, and make the story ABOUT the fact that Mary is an individual human being, not an ideal personification of motherhood.

When we meet this version of Mary, her whole world has been taken from her. Her husband is dead, her small children are lost to her. Her friends are thirty years older, or dead. I love how the show handles Mary’s reaction to the ubiquity of smartphones. It’s not a joke about moms being bad at technology. It’s profoundly disconcerting. It’s sad and strange, especially for a person so smart and competent to suddenly be in a world where she lacks foundational knowledge - it’s almost like everyone else speaks another language. She doesn’t fit.

So she tries to find her way. She’s a fully-realized person, just as conflicted and complex as Sam and Dean, with her own goals, flaws, fears, vulnerabilities. (And THANK GOD she’s tough, not in need of her childrens’ protection.)

I imagine myself in her position - with these two well-meaning, overwhelming adult children tracking her every move - and I completely understand her need to break away and carve a space for herself. The pressure and weight of their expectation, on top of everything else she’s going through, would be overwhelming.

As with the best writing in Supernatural, Mary makes choices that are not entirely wrong and not entirely right. Her embrace of the British Men of Letters is driven by guilt that her deal with Azazel destroyed her childrens’ lives, and her own need create a purpose for her life in this strange new world, and a sincere belief that it really will make the world a better place. It’s the same kind of complex psychological motivations that would drive Sam or Dean. (I have a whole other post brewing about that storyline, and about the unique and brilliant way that Supernatural’s handles moral ambiguity.)

Mary’s reaction to her adult children was so unexpected, but so right. One of those character-deepening twists that make perfect sense in retrospect.

Mary struggles with Dean, and connects more with Sam. This is what I mean about Supernatural being great at subverting expectations - because we’ve spent the entire series knowing that Dean is the one most shaped by Mary - the one who remembers her, who dreams of her, who longs for her, who can’t even say her name without flinching. And Sam is the one who doesn’t remember her - who tells Dean in the Pilot “If it weren't for pictures I wouldn't even know what Mom looks like.”

But it makes perfect sense. Sam, without the weight of a lifetime of expectations, treats Mary as an individual and tries to understand her needs. Dean struggles to see beyond what Mary means to him, and what he needs from her. Dean’s love is overwhelming, and suffocating.

There’s this great line in season twelve - I can’t remember where, but it’s when Sam and Dean are talking about the British Men of Letters, not quite agreeing or disagreeing, and Sam says something like “I know you think [whatever]” and Dean interrupts and says “WE think.” (Sorry, I need to rewatch and dig up the quote.) It’s borderline abusive, and it must be exhausting for Sam, to live with someone so overbearing that you’re not even allowed to have a different opinion.

The whole season deals with Dean’s abandonment complex - going right back to the heart of the Pilot, “I can’t do this alone.” Dean is so afraid of being abandoned that he clutches his loved ones way too closely. We understand and sympathize because we know where it came from - the death of his mother at four, the neglect from his father, twelve seasons of everyone he loves dying - but that doesn’t mean he would be easy to live with.

The line that kept running through my head when watching Dean this season is from Marilyn Manson - “When all of your wishes are granted, many of your dreams will be destroyed.”

Mary’s return is an incredible opportunity for character exploration and character growth for Dean. In many ways Dean is emotionally stuck at the age of four, unable to move on from the loss of his mother. He’s finally forced to recognize that his perceptions from that time were a tiny sliver of the truth, a four year old’s limited view. Maybe these dreams need to be destroyed. You can’t live your entire adult life longing for the cocoon you were in when you were four. (Or, I mean you can, you’d be Dean Winchester, but it’s not healthy.)

Dean needed his mother’s love AS A FOUR YEAR OLD, and it’s devastating that it was ripped away from him, but for his own sanity he needs to move on. I love that Mary flat out tells him that he’s not a child anymore. He needs to hear it.

The other side of the story is Dean’s perspective, which is incredibly sympathetic. Supernatural does a brilliant job telling a complex story where no one is entirely right or wrong. Dean tries so hard. He knows he’s weird and socially awkward. He doesn’t want to scare Mary away. He wants so desperately for their relationship to work. The scenes of him angsting over what to text her are some of my favorite moments ever in the show. It’s so surreal and yet so truthful.

And I have to admit - as much as I loved Mary NOT functioning as stereotypical mother figure - I also LOVED when she finally found out how tragic the boys’ childhood was. It was completely cathartic for me as an audience member. Those boys went through more than any child should have to bear. Dean is so scarred by it, and he’s this amazing person so full of love and compassion and this beautiful vibrant light that has been twisted by these awful experiences he’s been through, and the audience has been watching him suffer for twelve years, longing for the equivalent of his mom to give him a hug. (Just look at the bazillions of hurt/comfort fanfics.) The emotional payoff of that validation finally happening from his actual mother is enormous. Intense, and it would be indulgent if it wasn’t so EARNED.

I love that in their big conversation at the end of the season, Dean phrases it as all about what SAM went through. Of course the entire audience is watching that scene going BUT DEAN. It’s Dean that Mary saves. It’s actually all about him, but he’d never say it. Brilliant writing.

#supernatural #supernatural meta #supernatural season 12 #spn meta #dean winchester #mary winchester

10 notes · View notes

valisi-clark · 8 years ago

Text

Qveertrash on AO3: “ Where did you get the idea of a sin-eater AU? The idea of sin-eaters is very interesting. They're like creatures that children get scared of. “

I’m answering this here under a cut because, of course, it’s a long ass story. The character limit on AO3 wouldn’t allow it.

Thank you everyone who has supported The Sin-eater with your comments and questions and kudos and reads!

It’s surprising to me, but my dad actually gave me the idea for the Sin-eater AU. About five years ago (way before I was even knew about Tumblr), I asked him what was one of the scariest/creepiest things he had ever seen as a kid.

He told me that one of the things that scared him the most, when he was a kid, was an episode of “Night Gallery”. “Night Gallery” is the series that Rod Serling started hosting and writing after “The Twilight Zone” ended. It’s not quite as good as “The Twilight Zone” in my opinion. But there’s one episode called “The Sins of the Fathers”.

My dad said the “The Sins of the Fathers” episode was one of the scariest things he can remember. I’ve watched it, and I agree. You can probably find the episode online for free now. Here’s a short summary of the episode:

In times before electricity and running water, when people died, they called for the sin-eater. The sin-eater was shunned, basically exiled, and he didn’t have any social interaction with regular people. He’s unclean. But people still need him to rid the corpses of their loved ones from sin.

The sin-eater marries a woman (how?), and he has a son. One night, a villager comes to their home and requests the sin-eater. The sin-eater’s wife says that she’ll send him. When the villager leaves, the woman goes to her young adult son and tells him that his father has died, and he has to eat for his father. But they don’t have enough money for food for the ritual.

The woman tells her son to go to the house of the villager, steal the food, come back, and eat for his father.

Naturally, this kid is freaked-the-fuck-out. It’s gross for one thing. Eating food near or directly off of a corpse? He does it anyway. He’s the next sin-eater. It’s his birthright.

He goes to the house, steals the food, goes home, and eats for his father. The catch is that he’s not only eating his father’s sins. He’s eating all of the sin’s that his father ever consumed. All of the sins of the generations before him and whoever they consumed. While he’s eating, he’s also screaming. It’s unnerving and disgusting to watch. You don’t know why he’s screaming, but you can only imagine how that food tastes, what he’s seeing in front of his unfocused eyes, what he’s feeling inside of his guts every time he swallows. It’s terrifying.

It’s also an amazing idea, and I fucking love that episode! It scares the shit out of me!

And sin-eating has been recorded as a real thing that people did. Not only in Europe, but also in Meso-America.

Here’s a quote from the short Wikipedia article about sin-eaters. This quote comes from a book called Funeral Customs, published in 1926:

“Professor Evans of the Presbyterian College, Carmarthen, actually saw a sin-eater about the year 1825, who was then living near Llanwenog, Cardiganshire. Abhorred by the superstitious villagers as a thing unclean, the sin-eater cut himself off from all social intercourse with his fellow creatures by reason of the life he had chosen; he lived as a rule in a remote place by himself, and those who chanced to meet him avoided him as they would a leper.”

When I found these things out, I was absolutely fascinated. How is this custom so old (Meso-America), so recent (about 200 years), but I had to watch a fictional story to learn about it? Why didn’t I learn about it in Mythology and Folklore? I’ve read a lot of articles about sin-eating, but the Wikipedia page for it is so short? Have people purposely not recorded information about these people because they were so disgusted? Also, this quote says that the sin-eater chose this life? Is that something someone can actually choose? Is sin-eating the reason that we eat food after a funeral?! How does this affect my modern-day culture?!

I have so many questions about this custom and the people who lived through it. But sin-eating is still being used as a fictional character device because it’s so good!

There are two types of sin-eaters: the kind that physically removes sin through the consumption of food and the kind that physically removes sin through some other means.

John Coffey in The Green Mile by Stephen King is a sin-eater. I’ve read an article about that.

When John Coffey removes the infection Paul Edgecomb, he’s technically removing the sin that accumulates in a human’s body as a flawed creature. There are sources that express the idea that sin becomes a physical ailment, sin leads to death through the accumulation of physical ailments in the body (religious texts, The Picture of Dorian Gray, these two come to mind first). However, Stephen King steps it up a notch in The Green Mile by showing us the excrement process. When John Coffey releases that plague of black... insects? from his mouth, he’s excreting the sin that he’s eaten from someone. Therefore, he’s not storing it, and it won’t physically affect him over a period of time. Does that mean if he didn’t release it that the sin would physically affect him? Probably. Stephen King avoided that degeneration process by adding the release process.

I’ve known for a while that I wanted to use sin-eaters in fiction, but I wasn’t exactly sure how to do it.

At first, I imagined Erwin as a prince of a nation and Levi as the sin-eater? That crumbled so fast. Erwin’s characterization is difficult to fit into a monarchy because he’s so independent and compassionate. In strict monarchies, a prince may not even know how to dress himself. In the first plot that I thought about, the king (Erwin’s father) dies, and they call one of the royal sin-eaters. Erwin’s never seen one before. Levi shows up because the Ackermans are royal sin-eaters. But why would Erwin even be allowed to look at him? Because he’s curious? Royal Guard Mike might agree to let Erwin look, but he’s definitely not going to agree to let Erwin build any sort of relationship with a sin-eater! That bullshit about royalty sneaking out to go see their lovers? Not a thing. A royal human is objectified. If something happens to King Erwin, the country would be in trouble, could be attacked before a new monarch is put into place. Erwin is an investment. And if he’s dependent on servants, how is he going to know how to sneak out with help?

So I flipped it around. Make Levi royal. Make Erwin the sin-eater. Erwin fits into the sin-eater role better, but Levi doesn’t fit royalty, not unless he’s a militaristic king. The plot was complicated before I even started. So I backed off.

I thought of the current plot a few months ago? And I sent the first chapter to @erwinsalive . She seemed to love it! And it made me happy to know that the world was so interesting to other people. She asked for more details, and I told her some of it. She made this face: ;-;

That encouraged me to keep writing! I like that face!

So then, I had to build the world. There were a few choices: How am I going to contain the sin-eaters? Solitary or together? I can put them behind a wall. Putting Erwin behind a wall always leads to something interesting. How are people going to recognize sin-eaters? Gloves with handcuffs built into them? But then when they escape, the gloves would be off. They aren’t going to keep people cuffed while they’re within the wall. I could separate the handcuffs, but eww... how are they going to keep their gloves clean? And it would be too easy to find a tool to remove them. That’s not enough conflict. It has to be more personal than gloves. Piercing? That could work. Levi’s knife work could come in handy if the metal is welded shut. Branding or tattooing? That’s the most traditional way to permanently mark government property, but.... then they would have to flay some of Erwin’s skin. Eww and oww. So let’s go piercing. Around the mouth area for the symbolism. Lips or tongue? Tongue. Then, if he pretends to be mute, he can hide in plain sight for a while. And also tongues... they’re great. A tongue bar with pieces that are gauged higher on either end. Then, you either have to cut the bar or cut the tongue. Done!

Setting: Levi owns a tea shop with his Mom (dreams do come true), Fatal Sporadic Insomnia kills Kuchel (because those Ackermans don’t sleep well due to nighttime royal guard duty, and everyone knows it), Levi has to buy a sin-eater. The sin-eater is Erwin. Erwin feels guilty for even being himself. His emotionally tortured state fits into this skin.

What about the sin-eater culture? Is Erwin’s going to have to eat his dad’s.... ugh! No, I can’t do that. It’s too sad. It’s too traumatic. I’ll never get him to rebel if I do that. I grossed myself out again.

How is sin-eating going to affect Erwin physically? In The Picture of Dorian Gray, the picture took all of Dorian Gray’s sins (a type of inanimate sin-eater), and the portrait was hideous by the end of the book. Will sin-eaters be affected? Will Erwin die young because he’s full of the sins of humanity? ..... I can’t do that. It hurt too much in canon. I’m not going to do that. He’s beautiful and healthy.

Therefore, sin-eaters aren’t real. They are a collection of unfortunate descendants of humans (immigrants) who were scammed by the government. “Eat sins for our people, and we’ll take care of you.” Over one hundred years later: “You’re fucking disgusting, and you are easily replaced and less than human. You will remain quarantined. The food we give you is now overpriced. We’ve just increased your taxes again.”

And when I tell the story from Erwin’s point of view, you’ll see what sparked the fire of rebellion. I’m excited to write it.

Thank you again for the wonderful question! I love talking about the writing process. I hope you find this, qveertrash! Thank you for your support!

#personal #the sin-eater #qveertrash #but also where are you?#i can't find your name anymore

18 notes · View notes

find-your-rp-partner · 8 years ago

Text

Calling all Villain Enthusiasts

Hello! I'm Autumn. I'm a 20-something woman currently located in PST, but this is subject to change once I decide on a grad school. I'm a working artist about to start graduate studies in the fall, and yes, art is a perk if we're a good fit! Ignore my oblique bribery.

What I'm Looking For: I won't roleplay with anyone below the age of 18. Sorry!

I'm looking for a partner(s) who has an appreciation for villainous characters, both playing them and playing against them. Beyond that, I'm looking for someone who appreciates the necessity of conflict to move the roleplay forward, and who is both generally active but also understands that real life takes precedent! It would be great to find all of that wrapped up in someone who wants to also get to know one another OOC. I'm a chatty (and I hope entertaining) person, and I do my most dastardly brainstorming/idea bouncing in an informal setting where I feel comfortable.

Basically, I work hard, I play hard, and I'm down for some awesome wicked villainy. Let's do this.

Availability: It's very rare that I'm not online every day. I do have a disability that can take me offline for multiple days at a time, but these episodes are quite rare, and if I am experiencing one I'll do everything in my power to ensure you aren't left in the dark. Perhaps because of this, I am incredibly patient and understand that real life is more important than roleplay. Having said that, I'd like a partner whose default availability is one or more responses per day.

The Basics: I'm a para/multi-para roleplayer, though I do not give a flying fuck about word count. My metrics for determining quality are a response which 1) satisfyingly responds to what my partner has written and 2) introduces a new element for my partner to respond to. I'm "literate," but I care way more about your ideas than whether or not you use an Oxford comma.

I play characters of all genders, and all pairings. In an ideal world, you would as well, but my bare minimum is that you are comfortable playing either gender in a M/F pairing. I am able to play as many characters as needed for the roleplay, depending on how ambitious it is, and ask that you are able to play at least two characters.

I only play OCs. I prefer if we make our own world, but I'm open to playing against canon characters/in established worlds, provided the fandom in question is aligned with my roleplay interests (see below).

Properties I have more than a passing familiarity with: A:TLA/LoK, Game of Thrones (show), OUAT, Harry Dresden, The Grishaverse, Vlad Taltos/Dragaera, John Dies at the End, Alien/Prometheus, Marvel (films), X-Men (films), Batman (films), True Blood, TVD, Hellsing (show and manga), Pokemon (first gen), SCP Foundation

Format: I have experience roleplaying via email, skype and tumblr. I may be open to trying a different format. For OOC/idea bouncing, I prefer you have access to skype but I'd also be down with making a chatzy or similar.

Interests: Genre-wise, I comfortably occupy the realm of speculative fiction, and everything within it. I've done space opera, steampunk, swords and sorcery, urban fantasy, post-apocalyptic, magical realism, parallel dimensions, horror, etc. I love it all, if I'm with the right partner. To that end, I love in-depth world building and all that entails.

As mentioned before, I adore a good villain. I write the kind of villains where "Lux Aeterna" may as well start playing when they enter the room, because you just know something awful (but epic) is about to happen. I'm looking for someone who brings the same enthusiasm to the table, who can both play the villain, and play well with them. Kinda like a quid pro quo "you ruin the lives of my characters and I'll ruin the lives of yours" deal.

Content: I'm no stranger to roleplaying scenes of abuse, trauma, or physical or psychological torture. You don't need to be as open to this type of content as I am, but if all "dark" content is off the table, we aren't a good match.

Smut: For the most part, I'm ambivalent about smut. I'm far more interested in the foreplay and the psychology of the event, than the mechanics of it. If you're a fade to black type of person, excellent. If you enjoy indulging in the occasional smut scene, I am more than happy to accommodate. If smut is your priority, we aren't a good match.

Limits: Bodily fluids/excretions and explicit depictions of rape or gore are a pass. I'm not into the anthro/furry scene. As far as most fetishes are concerned, I can accommodate the tamer ones, but if you're looking for a partner for the primary purpose of fetish play, keep on lookin'.

Writing samples, if you're into that kinda thing. tw: murder, blood, mindfuckery, dissociation. These are actual roleplay responses, not self-paras or drabbles or excerpts from my novel, so you may have to infer context.

If you actually read all of this and it sounds like a grand ol' horrorshow to you, please contact me below:

skype: schmeddie. (with the period)

email: [email protected]

#rp partner search #rp partner ad #rp ad #rp search #original #email #skype #other #submission

7 notes · View notes

magicalworldweb · 6 years ago

Text

Are you a fan of detailed fantasy worlds that will take you far away to a place of dragons and demons and humans with magic powers? I have a series for you!

Lisa contacted me some time ago when I first announced that I was going to do some author interviews. We’ve been author friends on Facebook for a while, and she also writes fantasy, so I thought I’d give her books a go and learn about the magic in her books.

I read Talismans, which is the first book in her Wise Ones series. Ley Lines comes next, and there’s a third book coming out in June. You can preorder it here.

Lisa’s fantasy world is well built. You can tell how much effort she’s put into building her magic system and the world of her characters. There’s a grand scheme to all of it, like most good fantasy books. Her magic users get their powers from God, so there’s a minor nod to that in the books. A kind of C.S. Lewis element for adults you might say. My favorite part was the interaction (and humor) between the wise ones and the dragons. I believe her sister does the art work for the books. Amazing, aren’t they? For a look at the third cover (and to learn more about Lisa), hop on over to https://www.magicintheland.com

Don’t forget to add her books to your Goodreads! Now let’s get to know more about Lisa!

Introduce yourself. Name. Nickname Hello, I’m Lisa Lowell, author of the Wise One series and also that big stack of ideas in my trunk that I started back when I was twelve. I could finish one a year and never get them all written. I’m from Oregon, but have traveled quite a bit and always came back to the quiet green of home. My husband and I have three children and love our life together (25 years next June) despite its unexpected twists. My nickname is unspeakable.

What personality trait has gotten you into the most trouble? The personality trait that has gotten me into the most trouble is a toss-up. When I was younger, it was putting myself down. It kept me from pursuing my writing and made for a lack of attachments. I wrote gloomy prose that no one wanted to read because I was so negative on myself. Then, after an epiphany that I won’t reveal here, I grew up. Now, in my adult years, I find my temper gets me into trouble. I have no patience for people since I didn’t learn how to make friends who didn’t love books and writing, so that frustration bleeds into my work and relationships. However, from my prior experiences with overcoming my first fatal flaw, I’ve insisted that my characters too, can grow, adapt and change.

What genre (of collection) do you write in and why? I started with fantasy, dabbled in sci-fi and even a little historical fiction. I minored in history and love to take a spin on ancient scripture. Why these three? It is the magical element I cannot resist. That’s why I don’t write within more established historical time periods. I need the fantasy that Egypt or Babylon can bring to their long-lost world. I enjoy science fiction for the same reason. Aliens and super heroes bring their own fantastical facets to the writing. In the end, it’s always about the magic.

Where do you call home? Home is western Oregon, in small rural towns all up and down the valley. I’ve never liked living in big cities, although I have done so in my younger years. I need the green of the forest, the splash of waterfalls and the quiet of a long walk in a garden in order to write what I do.

What books are/have you written? At present I have two books published: Talismans and Ley Lines, the first two in Wise Ones series. There are nine in that series altogether, and all are accepted for publication. The third, Life Giver, is about to be published as well. Also, I’ve got several stand alone novels that I haven’t pursued yet. One, Dual, is a nanowrimo attempt that failed because I wanted it to be of better quality, so I took two months on it. I also have an historical romance set in ancient Babylon, Israel and Egypt. In between books for the Wise One series, I’m fleshing out a six or seven book sci-fi series called Markpath that I’ve dabbled with for over twenty years. In other words, I’ve got too much writing to stop and enjoy a bout of writer’s block.

If you are having a rotten day, what do you do to conquer that? My house is at its cleanest when I’m at my meanest. If I’m having a rotten day, I break out the scrub brushes and take my frustration out on the hard surfaces of my house. It’s therapeutic and cathartic as well as safer than taking it out on those loved ones around me. I would do that too easily. Then I go for a walk in the garden.

What would you name your boat? First of all, I would never own a boat. My father-in-law says boat stands for ‘break out another thousand’, and I am a consummate penny pincher. However, if I did own a boat it would be called Talisman, after my first published book.

What’s your biggest kitchen disaster? My biggest kitchen disaster was miserable because of what it meant. I’m not a great cook so my husband Pat used to do most of the cooking. However, he developed Parkinsons about fifteen years ago and the worst day was when he was trying to make spaghetti. He was pouring in a can of tomato sauce and the shakes were so bad that he dropped the nearly full can into the sauce and it splattered throughout the kitchen, even on the ceiling. I had to repaint the ceiling and wash all the cupboards. However, the worst part was taking the spoon away from him permanently. It was one of the first restrictions Parkinsons imposed on the man I love, but not the last. I remember that miserable day every time he loses something more he once loved to do.

Tell me about one of your characters. Owailion, from the first Wise Ones novel, has a place in my heart. He is an engineer, who had his memory destroyed before he was brought to my world and made into an apprentice in magic, taught by the dragons. He is quiet and very intelligent, but can be overwhelmed by beauty. That awe makes him utterly speechless. I like him a lot, but would we get along in real life? I think I would love to go out for dinner with him, but I could not see myself being a friend. He’s a bit too stiff and I would feel like I was in the presence of a prophet. Of course, he would get along with me because I love them, despite his flaws. He is far better than me.

If someone asked to be your apprentice and learn all that you know, what would they end up learning? I am a teacher in my day job. Hence the reason I dabble in writing – to help pay the bills since teaching pays squat and my husband can no longer work. If someone (and several have) asked to apprentice under me, they would have quite a few subjects from which to select. I can teach sign language, writing, public speaking and drawing. I also dabble in Swedish, calligraphy, piano, guitar, voice lessons and genealogy. Take your pick. I don’t limit myself, why should you?

What are your future writing plans? I plan on finishing the Wise Ones series (six more to go) and get Dual and Prince of Samaria up and running. Those are already written and the editing and revision are not nearly as satisfying as the writing portion, so I’d sustain my writing muse by delving into the Markpath series, which I like more than the Wise Ones. It will take more time because of its content and the research needed, but it’s far more dynamic and rawer, which I like.

You’re in the middle of a wizarding duel. What animal do you transfigure into? This is funny because one of the characters in book #7 in the Wise Ones has that ability and he cannot do anything that’s as large as a dragon, or as small as a microbe, so he often wants to become that dragon. I’d probably select a dragon simply because I could get away and yet still be very safe if I elected to stay. I’m a lover, not a fighter, and when I get angry, I’m fearsome. A dragon that would fly away doesn’t strike me as a coward, but also doesn’t have to fight. That’s what I like about it.

You are transported to one of your favorite books. Where are you? I am on Pern, although I don’t think I’d like it there very much. I would probably not be a dragonrider, so the rest of life would be rather inglorious. Maybe I could handle being a harper. I like music and while I’m not overly talented, the teaching of children is right up my path.

Thank you, Lisa, for letting us get to you know and your books a little better. I feel like we could chill over coffee if we were closer neighbors! It’s been a pleasure, and it sounds like we can expect more good literature from you!

Live Bravely Love Strongly AEM

Interview with the Author: Lisa Lowell Are you a fan of detailed fantasy worlds that will take you far away to a place of dragons and demons and humans with magic powers?

#author #books #interview

0 notes