#needed to get things off my chest

[zionchubby14]

I wasn't sure if I was going to make a post about this, but this is something I feel like I need to do, especially for those who know and care about me (I know, people care on here? That's crazy.). I'm definitely going to struggle typing this all out, but...here it goes.

_____

So over the past month (and quite possibly earlier), Mom has been dealing some abdominal pain that radiates to her back. The pain would be so bad that it would cause her to throw up at times. She barely ate and slept while this was going on. On January 6th, things finally came to a head and we made the call to take her to the hospital.

When she first came in, she was diagnosed as suffering from pancreatitis (for those who don't know, it's inflammation of the pancreas that, if left untreated, can cause a high amount of pain and nausea to the person. There's two types of pancreatitis: acute, which is very treatable and will go away after a while, and chronic, which will last a lot longer and hurt more). They were able to treat her and she felt better for a while, discharging her after 3 days. When they released her, they wanted her to get a endoscopy test done up at a hospital in Royal Oak. With neither Mom or I having a car, this was difficult for us to do. But we would come to know why soon enough.

Mom came home and for a day or two, she seemed fine. She ate well and was able to sleep soundly, which I thought was the important thing. But the pain and nausea eventually came back with a vengeance We tried every the hospital doctors had told us: heating pads, soft to liquid diet, pain patches. Nothing was working. Her primary care doctor even had her go on some antibiotics and a stronger pain med than she had, but nothing seemed to help matters. We took her back to the hospital this past Saturday, January 20th.

When we initially got there, after they had done a CT scan on Mom, they said that the pancreatitis was gone. But what was left was a mass on her pancreas. Scared and unsure as to what it may be, they admitted her and has been in the hospital since. On Tuesday, they took her to the University of Toledo Medical Center for the endoscopy and see what the mass might be. They did the scope and drew fluid from the mass for testing.

On Wednesday, we get the news that it is cancer. More precisely, metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. In layman's terms, it's Stage IV pancreatic cancer, not curable.

I could not believe it...

We don't really know how long she may have left, but the rough and harsh estimate is less than 6 months...

Needless to say, I broke down, not in front of Mom or my brothers (who have been with Mom and I throughout this whole thing).

I can't imagine being here on Earth without Mom and I'm somehow going to have to figure out how to...I panicked and wanted to run away...a moment of weakness...

I don't know what will happen between now and the inevitable day, but we all agreed that we're going to try and make the most out of the days she does have left. I know that there will be bad days ahead, and there'll be good days as well.

But it's tough, knowing that the last few years I've been taking care of her (and complaining about her behavior, which is making me feel guilty about, now that this is happening) and it's going to come to an end.

_____

I know this isn't the greatest of things to post on here, but I needed some therapeutic way to get some of the emotions I am feeling right now out and to inform you all of what has been going on. I thank you all for the thoughts and positive vibes before and coming in the future. It's going to be a rough time ahead and I hope you will all bear with me in the meantime.

I love you all.

[fernsnailz]

sorry these kinds of comments have been really pissing me off recently lol

[cringevalue]

there’s a knock at the door. eddie opens it. he’s covered in bruises and bite marks, lipstick smeared down his chin and mascara trailing into his hairline.

���you should see the other guy,” he says.

steve steps into the doorway then, face and neck dotted with delicate kiss stains, lips swollen and eyes glassy with love.

[debatablyspicydurian]

I know the full arsenal update is out and hype for that but I just found the gutterman's poem in 7-2 and I HAVE to type about it because its night where I am and I cant wake up my friends to rant about Ultrakill.

Anyway, absolutely indescribable how we have the thoughts of a machine just laid bear in a secret for the first and maybe last time. The fact that a machine made for merciless slaughter could not only feel sadness for the person powering it but also WRITE a POEM? A machine made art??? The knowledge that they understand how cruel it is to make a human a blood battery, recognize it as torture, but also feel gratitude for the life they've been given?? It was known that machines had a sense of aesthetic from Swordsmachine and Mindflayer's entries but. Goddamn. The gutterman refers to the human as their mother and it states it CRIED when it crushed her skull as it hoped it would redeem its life.

Also the excerpt, "I know I know you would hate me so, and mother of me, I do too." Does this mean the Gutterman hated itself as much as the human? Did it hate the human instead along with the feelings of love and gratitude? Probably the former. Gutterman angst is so in.

V2's mannerisms and Swordsmachine's data entry are intresting, but a gutterman's eulogy for its prisoner and its attempt at redemption is another level. Actual machine thought process recorded!! Sapient lifeform that knows only war and death! The fact that the gutterman crushing the human's skull seemed to be out of mercy. Ough.

Noone has to interact I havent proof read this I am just RANTING this is CRAZY HAKITA HOW COULD YOU AND THE TEAM DO THIS

[localguy2]

I hate that this is genuinely something I'm writing rn, but nothing has more RATTLED my faith in the writing team's ability to write a Zane story then him calliNG ARIN CRINGE-

[assiraphales]

I think one of the reasons I’ve taken a more hands off approach to being in the good omens fandom is because I genuinely can’t stand a large majority of the discourse. and I love discourse! but so much of it is based on fanon evidence, not canon evidence, and some of it is so borderline entitled. ‘it’s not enough!!!! azira and crowley kissing isn’t enough!!!!’ sorry two canonically non-binary entities being in canonical love isn’t good enough? ‘aziraphale was acting ooc!!!! why did he choose heaven’ I am sorry u don’t have enough media literacy to see the provided evidence where he’s clearly weighed down by THOUSANDS of years of religious devotion and trauma. ‘crowley is a little meow meow who did nothing wrong’ babe look me in the eyes. he’s at fault too. azira and crowley have a messy relationship riddled with miscommunication. one attempt at sharing his feelings doesn’t fix that. ‘it’s to angsty!! they should have ended up together’ for the love of god it’s a three part arc. of course there’s going to be angst. this isn’t a fanfic. stop acting like it’s a fanfic!!

[science-lings]

okay this has been going through my mind for days and I have to get my thoughts out before I explode

Disclaimer, this is not talking about a specific artist/person and would never condone or participate in anon hate or online bullying for any reason but especially this one. 

I get why people are mad about Link being portrayed as this buff, hypermasculine, tall guy. I am too (again don’t fucking attack people over it though) and it seems like such an infuriating way to change the character just to fit into some ideal of hypermasculine attractiveness or to make a ship fall into a more hetero lense by making him a decent foot taller than whatever girl he’s being paired with. 

The world of video games and action movies and every form of media ever is extremely saturated with male characters that are swole and manly and whatever other descriptors people are trying to push onto Link that don’t fit into his actual character. There are so many characters out there that already fit this male standard and having a clearly androgynous elf guy was like a breath of fresh air. 

Link was literally designed to be a character whose lines on gender were blurred, ‘a girl with a masculine touch or a guy with a feminine touch’ so that anyone could project themselves onto him. His physical design in botw/totk was specifically made to be feminine enough to wear a certain outfit to pass as a woman (which includes a nearly mandatory cutscene where he puts on the clothes and blushes after being called pretty, like you have to be blind to think that its an experience that he doesn’t like at all) and in totk there are a bunch of outfits made for Link that are blatantly gnc, ones that are practically dresses, include nail polish and lipstick, you can even dye his hair bright and vivid colors and that’s half way to giving him new pronouns. The whole reason Linkle isn’t included in more mainline loz games was because her existence would force Link into a gender dichotomy, if there's a clearly female version of the main hero, that means the main hero has to be a man, and they would rather abandon a potential reoccurring character than make Link conform to a gender binary. 

So pardon me when it feels disingenuous and even malicious for him to be morphed into these clear masculine ideals, where he towers over any female romantic partner (even when in canon he is regularly depicted as noticeably shorter than her) or even in m/m fanworks he’s really beefed up, perhaps to make the scene feel more gay or something. 

Perhaps it’s because his more twink-y/ femboy body type is so heavily sexualized (though obviously when people are sculping abs on him it’s totally not because they’re horny about it) and that’s an issue in itself that bothers me. But it’s just so tiring to see one of the very few popular main characters who is short and feminine and androgynous be molded into just another bland muscle-headed action hero over and over and over again. 

I’m not mad at the creators for portraying him differently than how I like him portrayed, I’m mad because we really do get so few characters like him in good popular media, and to be honest, I really like him the way that he is. I love that he’s tiny and has long hair and has the option to dress any way the player likes. It seems a little distasteful to make him taller than a female love interest just because that’s how straight couples have to be, there’s just never been a real straight couple where the guy is shorter than the girl, that’s just Impossible! (/s) 

[locallygrowndaikon]

rate my house

[aerequets]

i very much appreciate how Yor, the strongest character, is so feminine

she’s obviously the physically strongest, and arguably the most mentally and/or emotionally strong. what i really appreciate is that this strength and her femininity are complements, instead of the two being treated as mutually exclusive like in many other media.

yor is soft spoken and gentle and kind to others. she feels emotions strongly and cries in front of others and shows her happiness. she has a natural inclination to take care of others. she is good with children, she is great at housekeeping. she may not be good at cooking but by gosh she tries; she wants to get better. she assumes the best in others and finds other women pretty and kind and admires them. she’s family oriented. 

yor is also insanely strong. she’s gone through extensive physical training since childhood, has multiple scars, has dealt with all kinds of people. she can kick a moving car, incapacitate a whole cow, take down a whole fleet of assassins, etc, etc. the list goes on. but despite all this and all that she’s been through, she didn’t become a tough, sardonic, mean-lean-killing-machine kind of character.

 what i’ve noticed in a lot of media is that there seems to be this kind of tradeoff that people think needs to happen in order for a female character to get “truly strong”. basically feminine = weak and masculine = strong. the character cries? not anymore she will never crack that poker face ever! the character cares for others? psh what no, care for yourself she’s not your maid. homemaking skills? useless, all she needs is the strength of her Fists and Harsh Words. she’s not like other vapid girls, she actually cares about the Real Important Fight which, undoubtedly, is also male-dominated. 

of course, all of this is set up as an opportunity for the male love interest to come in and “break down her walls” because women are just waiting for the right man to change them, but i digress.

why? why are the things that are inherently feminine deemed as inferior? 

a good example i can think of is cinderella, or to be more specific, an opinion about cinderella that was popular (and may still be, i dont know tbh): she is weak for needing a prince to save her. 

lets break this down: this girl gets emotionally, phyiscally, and mentally abused from her childhood into young adulthood by the people who are supposed to care for her. despite all this, she remains kind towards others and attentive in what she does. she seizes what she believes could be her one and only chance at freedom, however fleeting, and ends up catching the attention of the person who is ultimately able to pull her out of her situation.

yes, she didn’t bust herself out of the house and shank the stepfam with her glass shoe. but does this mean she is weak? is that kind of emotional resilience within someone after years of abuse what can truly be categorized as weak? 

anyways, all this is to say that yor is built up as the strong one in multiple ways, and the narrative doesn’t act like her nonmasculine qualities are somehow reductive or lesser, and i very much appreciate how rich her character is. i like so many things about this series man im just

[nofomogirl]

Good Omen's problem with having two canons

They're fundamentally different. That's the problem. That's my point.

For quite a while I focused almost exclusively on the new season of Good Omens, but now I am slowly delving into analysis that takes the entire show into account, and I've encountered a little obstacle. Namely, things from S1 can be really tricky to interpret.

Fair warning: this post is going to zig-zag between various points but I want you to trust me and take this scenic route with me. It will take us somewhere eventually, I promise.

The Arrangement

It's one of the core elements in the Good Omens universe and at the same time a perfect example of the issue I want to discuss. So let's have a closer look together.

In the book, the Arrangement is presented to us in two passages:

the first one, where it is first - very briefly - mentioned:

Aziraphale had tried to explain [free will] to him once. The whole point, he'd said - this was somewhere around 1020, when they'd first reached their little Arrangement - the whole point was that when a human was good or bad it was because they wanted to be.

and the second one, where it is properly introduced and explained:

The Arrangement was very simple, so simple in fact, that it didn't really deserve the capital letter, which it had got for simply being in existence for so long. It was the sort of sensible arrangement that many isolated agents, working in awkward conditions a long way from their superiors, reach with their opposite number when they realize they have more in common with their immediate opponents than their remote allies. It meant a tacit non-interference in certain of each other's activities. It made certain that while neither really won, also neither really lost, and both were able to demonstrate to their masters the great strides they were making against a cunning and well-informed adversary. (...) And then, of course, it had seemed even natural that they should, as it were, hold the fort for one another whenever common sense dictated. Both were of angel stock, after all. If one was going to Hull for a quick temptation, it made sense to nip across the city and carry out a standard brief moment of divine ecstasy. It'd get done anyway, and being sensible about it gave everyone more free time and cut down on expenses.

In the show, the Arrangement is presented to us in two original scenes in the cold opening of S1E3:

(I am quoting most relevant dialogues only)

537 AD, Wessex:

C: So we're both working very hard in damp places and just canceling each other out? A: Well, you could put it like that. It is a bit damp. C: Be easier if we both stayed home. If we just send messages back to our head offices saying we'd done everything they'd asked for, wouldn't it? A: But that would be lying. C: Eh, possibly, but the end result would be the same. Cancel each other out. A: But my dear fellow... well, they'd check. Michael's a bit of a stickler. You don't want to get Gabriel upset with you. C: Oh, our lot have better things to do than verifying compliance reports from Earth. As long as they get paperwork they seem happy enough. As long as you're being seen doing something every now and again. A: No! Absolutely not! I am shocked that you would even imply such a thing. We're not having that conversation, not another word!

1601 AD, The Globe Theatre:

A: I have to be in Edinburgh at the end of the week. A couple of blessings to do. A minor miracle to perform. (...) C: I'm meant to be heading to Edinburgh too this week. Tempting a clan leader to steal some cattle. A: Doesn't sound like hard work. C: That's why I thought we should... Well, bit of a waste of effort, both of us going all the way to Scotland. A: You cannot actually be suggesting what I infer that you are implying. C: Which is? A: That just one of us goes to Edingburgh, does both. The blessing and the tempting. C: We've done it before. Dozens of times now. The Arrangement- A: Don't say that! C: Our respective offices don't actually care how things get done. They just want to know they can cross it off the list.

S2 doesn't actually reference the Arrangement. But it does reuse the dialogue about free will where the 1020 date is dropped. We will get back to it.

The challenge of adapting Good Omens

Good Omens shares a certain characteristic with all of Terry Pratchett's solo books I've read - it couldn't care less about "showing instead of telling". Which I love, just to be clear. A book is a written medium. It's made with words and one of words' major strengths is that you can use them to just tell things point blanc.

Good Omens does it a lot and it's fantastic.

Look at that second passage from the book I quoted earlier.

From just those few sentences we learn a lot about the relationships between:

Heaven and Hell (opponents and competition)

Aziraphale and Crowley (two individuals in the same position and in direct contact with each other)

Aziraphale/Crowley and Heaven/Hell (field agent and a remote HQ that are not in direct contact)

Aziraphale/Crowley and Earth (two individuals and a space they live in)

Heaven/Hell and Earth (a board where the game is played, only winning or losing matters, what actually happens on a board does not)

It's really an extra condensed worldbuilding gem sprinkled with humor, so it's no surprise it's become one of the most iconic passages from the book.

I mean, just browse through some interviews with David and Michael - especially the ones from 2019 - where they explain what Aziraphale and Crowley are about. You'll be hard-pressed to find any where they don't reference that specific paragraph, consciously or otherwise.

But it's only this neat on the pages of the book, where narration like this takes mere seconds to absorb. It's impossible to convey the same information in a visual medium with anywhere near the same efficiency.

The fact that the majority of Good Omens is like this was, in my opinion, a main challenge the adaptation faced. The book is very narration-heavy. It's full of fun facts about characters, side jokes, hilarious comments, etc. Some of that precious material was salvaged by introducing God as a narrator, but there was only so much of it you could squeeze into a TV show. The rest had to either be fit into dialogues or lost in translation from the written medium to the visual one.

Obviously, in the case of the Arrangement, it was the dialogues.

Book canon and show canon

We all know they're not the same. Neil Gaiman also pointed it out several times. But I think our mistake is that we still tend to think about them as complementary.

Look at the Arrangement again. The show canon seems to merely expand on the book canon. Add extra details and fill in the blanks. The Arrangement works the exact same way, except now we also know more about how it started.

If we compile what we know from the book with what we know from the show, we get a more detailed timeline:

Crowley first proposes the Arrangement in 537 (show).

The Arrangement starts in 1020 (book), ie. Aziraphale finally agrees to it (show - deduction); we don't know for sure if it's a "basic version" (not getting in each other's way), or a "full version" (doing each other's jobs) but we can assume it's the former.

In 1601 "full version" of the Arrangement is in place for some time (they've done it dozens of times) but Aziraphale still objects and needs convincing.

But read that description from a book once more.

Does it really fit into the version of events shown in the TV series?

The Arrangement in the book is something that just happened. A natural, and in a way inevitable result of Aziraphale and Crowley's circumstances. We are never told who came up with it first because it doesn't matter. Because it could have been either of them. Because after five millennia on Earth, they were both ready to do it. They were both of the same mind. For all we know it might have been an unspoken agreement all along!

But for the show, the creators had to come up with a good reason for the Arrangement to be discussed out loud. And what could be a more natural situation for someone to describe and explain an idea than trying to sell that idea to someone else?

For that practical reason - among many others, no doubt - the Arrangement is not only explicitly Crowley's idea, but an idea Aziraphale vehemently rejects at first. He needs to be convinced and even when he finally relents he's never entirely comfortable with it. He keeps objecting and it requires Crowley's constant effort for them to keep cooperating in any way.

The fact that Aziraphale is reluctant gives Crowley a perfect reason to keep convincing him ie. talk about the Arrangement. But the fact that he needs to explain and keep convincing Aziraphale means that Aziraphale is no longer a person who understands the same things and feels the same way.

That is a huge change.

Of course, you may say that what I've written about the Arrangement in the book is just my interpretation. It's true that technically there's nothing there that would contradict the events from the show in any way. The thing is, the events in the show aren't very compatible with the overall characterization of the ineffable duo in the book.

Evolution of Aziraphale and Crowley

You might have read that our leading pair was originally conceived as a single character that Neil and Terry eventually decided to split into two separate individuals.

My reaction when I first learned about it was: "Of course they were! That makes so much sense!" Because honestly, as a person who watched the show first and then read the book, I was surprised at how few differences there were between the two in the original text. If you squint your eyes really tight, you can see how book!Aziraphale and book!Crowley are two versions of the same character. They're far more similar than their show versions.

Most importantly, their attitudes toward Heaven and Hell are pretty much identical. Perfectly mirrored in every regard. What Hell is for Crowley, Heaven is for Aziraphale. What Hell is for Aziraphale, Heaven is for Crowley. In. Every. Possible. Way.

Allow me to present some evidence from the book.

Exhibit #1: the end of the scene where Crowley convinces Aziraphale to interfere with Warlock's upbringing

'You're saying the child isn't evil of itself?' he said slowly. 'Potentially evil. Potentially good too, I suppose. Just this huge powerful potentiality, waiting to be shaped,' said Crowley. He shrugged. 'Anyway, why're we talking about this good and evil? They're just names for sides. We know that.' 'I suppose it's got to be worth a try,' said the angel. Crowley nodded encouragingly. 'Agreed?' said the demon, holding out his hand. The angel shook it, cautiously. 'It'll certainly be more interesting than saints,' he said. 'And it'll be for the child's own good, in the long run,' said Crowley. (...)

When Crowley first points out that good and evil are just names for sides, and then insists it's something they both know, Aziraphale doesn't react in any way. That's because these aren't things that book!Aziraphale disagrees with. He does indeed know it and doesn't deny it.

Also, please note just how cynical the angel is here with his comment that influencing the Antichrist would be a more interesting project than influencing saints!

Both would be rather OOC for show!Aziraphale.

Exhibit #2: the scene just after Warlock Dowling's birthday party, when it becomes evident he is not the Antichrist

'You said it was him!' moaned Aziraphale (...) 'It was him,' said Crowley. (...) 'Then someone else must be interfering.' 'There isn't anyone else! There's just us, right? Good and Evil. One side or the other.' He thumped the steering wheel. 'You'll be amazed at the kind of things they can do to you, down there,' he said. 'I imagine they're very similar to the sort of things they can do to you up there,' said Aziraphale. 'Come off it. Your lot get ineffable mercy,' said Crowley sourly. 'Yes? Did you ever visit Gomorrah?' 'Sure' said the demon. 'There was this great little tavern where you could get these terrific fermented date-palm cocktails with nutmeg and crushed lemongrass-' 'I meant afterwards.' 'Oh.'

Can you imagine this kind of exchange in the TV series? Can you imagine show!Aziraphale being this realistic about Heaven, and show!Crowley so naive about it? There's no way.

Show!Aziraphale genuinely believes that Heaven is good at its core.

Book!Aziraphale knows Heaven isn't any different than Hell and would punish him just as ruthlessly and unfairly as Hell would Crowley.

Show!Crowley understands both Heaven and Hell on a very deep level and is highly aware of their true nature.

Book!Crowley buys a piece of celestial propaganda about ineffable mercy and actually expects Heaven to be forgiving.

Let the magnitude of that difference sink.

Exhibit #3: same scene, a bit further

'So all we've got to do is find it,' said Crowley. 'Go through the hospital records.' The Bentley's engine coughed into life and the car leapt forward, forcing Aziraphale back into the seat. 'And then what?' he said. 'And then we find the child.' 'And then what?' The angel shut his eyes as the car crabbed around the corner. 'Don't know.' 'Good grief.' 'I suppose (...) your people wouldn't consider (...) giving me asylum?' 'I was going to ask you the same thing. (...)'

This is just a cherry on top, really.

Yes, in the book, when things go pear-shaped, both Aziraphale and Crowley consider seeking asylum on the opposite side.

Do you need more proof that book canon and show canon really aren't as compatible as they may seem?

Free will

As promised, let's get back to that dialogue because while it may not be obvious at first glance it really illustrates perfectly the problem arising from balancing between two canons.

Here is the full quote from the book:

Aziraphale had tried to explain [free will] to him once. The whole point, he'd said - this was somewhere around 1020, when they'd first reached their little Arrangement - the whole point was that when a human was good or bad it was because they wanted to be. Whereas people like Crowley and, of course, himself, were set in their ways right from the start. People couldn't become truly holy, he said, unless they also had the opportunity to be definitively wicked. Crowley had thought about it for some time and, around about 1023, had said, Hang on, that only works, right, if you start everyone off equal, OK? You can't start someone off in a muddy shack in the middle of a war zone and expect them to do as well as someone born in a castle. Ah, Aziraphale had said, that's the good bit. The lower you start, the more opportunities you have. Crowley had said, That's lunatic. No, said Aziraphale, it's ineffable.

And here, for comparison, is how it was reused in S2E3:

A: There is a stolen body in that barrel! This is wicked! C: Oh, I'm down with wicked! Anyway, is it wicked? She needed the money. A: That is irrelevant. Look, I am good. You, I'm afraid, are evil. But people get a choice. You know, they cannot be truly holy unless they also get the opportunity to be wicked. She is wicked. C: Yeah, that only works if you start everyone off equal. You can't start someone off like that and expect her to do as well as someone born in a castle. A: Ah, but no, no. That's the good bit. The lower you start, the more opportunities you have. So Elspeth here has all the opportunities because she's so poor. C: That's lunacy. A: No, that's ineffable.

I'll be honest with you - I didn't like that scene in the show. It felt jarring and off. Aziraphale was acting like it was his first day on Earth and it was frustrating to watch.

Then, on one of the rewatches, just as I was rolling my eyes at "that's ineffable", a bulb lit in my brain. That line didn't work there because it wasn't created to be there! In the book and in S1 "it's ineffable" was kind of Aziraphale's catchphrase but in S2 it only appears this once. More importantly, in the book and S1, the fact that the angel would say that was all a build-up to the scene when he threw it in Heaven's face at the Tadfield Airbase. Using that word in S2 was like trying to make a running joke that has already reached its destination run again.

And just like that one line the entire dialogue didn't fit because it wasn't meant to be there. It was created for an entirely different context.

What's the difference?

Firstly, book!husbands' conviction was very shallow and it wasn't uncommon for both of them to spout slogans without meaning them. Therefore, book!Aziraphale's words didn't carry that much weight. The very fact that the conversation took place at the same time they formed the Arrangement tells us something about how serious he was. But show!Aziraphale's relationship with his beliefs is different, so when he says things like that it's a much bigger deal.

Secondly, the book explicitly states that Aziraphale and Crowley only developed free will on Earth, due to extended exposure to mankind. The show never really makes a stand on the matter but based on what we've seen so far I think we can safely assume that angels and demons are capable of making their own choices as much as humans do.

In other words, in its original context, the conversation was just Aziraphale talking about a concept he didn't fully grasp, quoting propaganda he didn't fully subscribe to. He was being ignorant and mildly obnoxious in an endearing way.

But using the same dialogue verbatim in the Resurrectionist carried a completely different meaning. Aziraphale who utters it in the show has no reason to be so ignorant about free will. Aziraphale who utters it in the show genuinely tries to defend Heaven. Most importantly, Aziraphale who utters it in the show, doesn't just idly bicker with his friend about general things but is judging an actual human individual that's right in front of them. That, more than anything else, makes it sound heartless and ignorant.

What is the problem with having two canons, exactly?

It's time to wrap things up.

In the opening paragraphs, I've mentioned that I've noticed the issue while interpreting scenes from S1, and yes, that was the case and I do believe that the existence of two canons is especially problematic for S1. That's because pretty much every scene in S1 is potentially like that dialogue about free will in S2, except subtler and harder to spot.

A grand majority of what we see and hear in S1 comes directly from the book. But while words and actions were kept, in some instances things that gave them their original meaning might no longer be valid in the show universe. Sometimes they easily take new meaning, and we don't even notice. But sometimes there's this dissonance that's not as easy to work around.

S1 deviated from the book and created its own canon. But the difference didn't seem to go very deep and it seemed perfectly reasonable to use some trivia from the book to shed some extra light on the content of the show. I used to do it in my head, even though I was aware of the changes that were made.

But S2 expanded the show canon so far beyond what was in the book that I'm really not sure it makes sense to compile them anymore.

There are a lot of things that were only explicitly stated in the book that I keep clinging to. But perhaps it's time to let go...

Thank you for your patience.

I know all of the above isn't exactly a revolutionary discovery, but I needed to get it off my chest before writing anything else.

[zionchubby14]

Last night was a fucking nightmare of a sleep attempt.

I had every intention to TRY and fall asleep anywhere between 3-5 am, as I am a night owl, enjoying the quiet and relaxing night to my leisure, and I have a lot of friends who live on the West Coast. So in this attempt, I went to lay down at about 3 am, only for my brain to decide, "You know what? You should play Candy Crush for a couple hours for no good reason. I'm still awake and you can't make me do anything." And after that, I was as wide awake as ever. I tried to force myself to sleep at 6 am, but my brain forced me to hear random noises that would keep me awake, noises like randoms sirens, constant knocking from the random void, or a random voice. It got to the point where I had to just block out the noises and try to sleep. But my brain had another plan: subconscious warfare.

At 7:30 am (yes, I could've easily just stayed up and tried to fight through the tired and gotten a more useful sleep, but I was beyond tired and needed), while trying to block out the auditorial hallucinations my brain was trying to distract me from my sleep goal, it decided to make me dream that something was terribly wrong and that I was dying. This made me wake up and I started to go in Panic Attack mode, until I realized that it was not the case. My brain tried this multiple times until I finally was able to sleep at roughly 9 am.

My god, I need to find a solution to this, because I feel so lethargic, so exhausted, and so mentally spent to function normally or as I had planned. As much as I want to sleep right now, I know that I will fight as much as I did last night and won't get a fulfilling sleep tonight if I went to bed.

I'm just tired...also, if you haven't done so already, please donate: https://gofund.me/92c12afd

So, so tired...

[natsmagi]

honestly the more i hear about engstars and its TLs the more i absolutely dread the inevitable release of poltergeist and what may ensue from it, bc if if the translators themselves are already invalidating arashis identity then i Really Truly do not want to see how theyll translate natsume and tsumugis microaggressions/transphobia towards her. esp since ive noticed a rise in people being comfortably transphobic towards her, and i REALLY do not wish to see natsume and tsumugi being stupid fucking morons be used as evidence to discredit her

and i think this is all the more reason why its VERY IMPORTANT for engstars to DIRECTLY ACKNOWLEDGE arashi and her gender. bc sometimes characters are STUPID and RUDE and APATHETIC. enstars is a story with NUANCED and FLAWED CHARACTERS, and when a character is being a fucking asshole youre meant to PROVE THEM WRONG. but they dont even acknowledge arashi as a girl themselves. so, if you do use engstars, please keep pressuring them bc omfg this is so bad and i can only see it getting worse

[sclerites]

one of my main gripes with the DC cinematic adaptations is that they don’t capture how absolutely FUCKING INSANE the world is. In the background of superman and lex beating each other up and/ or kissing or whatever, Constantine rolled a blunt made from swamp thing plant stuff to spite the swamp thing who had grown in his flat out of Constantine’s ash tray, only to get possessed by the swamp thing so that he could fuck his wife so they could have a kid or something, while etrigan, a centuries old man possessed by a demon (I think) and the phantom stranger, who is apparently the reincarnation (I think) of fucking Judas from The Bible, watch them. Meanwhile in the 25th century a man who named himself Booster steals some superhero shit from a museum, travels back in time and becomes famous by saving fucking president Ronald Reagan from dying. It is at least heavily implied that magaret thatcher (or at least conservatives, generally) are Actual demons from Actual hell. Actually, scratch that. Fucking Margaret thatcher canonically exists in the same universe as the flash, period. Also, on that topic: the flash, a man who possesses the superhuman ability of speed, as gifted to him by the speed force, one of the seven cosmic forces of the universe which also includes: the emotional electromagnetic spectrum, life force, the sphere of gods, dimensional superstructure, collective unconscious, and faithfulness. And that’s not even starting on the seven hidden forces. Also I might have skipped past it but also fucking god and satan exist, and so does probably every other god from every pantheon and religion but that’s all kinda brushed over except when it isn’t. And that isn’t even scratching the fucking surface, good god.

Big shoutout to DC for being just absolutely goddamn bizarre please never change 💛

[kebriones]

"I want art to be my job but I can't make art if I feel like I have to"

My brother in christ you are either gonna have to work on that big time or you won't be able to make a living through art, that's just how it is.

(sometimes i talk to people who dream of making a living as artists and they are like grown adults and they still think it's going to be some ideal job where they just do whatever they feel like and get paid to have fun forever and I'm like, this couldn't be further from the truth. You have to love the making of art enough to be able to do it a LOT. And that's something you can work on if it doesn't happen by itself. If you absolutely can't force yourself, or if it's making you miserable to force yourself to draw, an art job isn't for you.)

[ohmyglobwhatthefrickamievendoing]

dj saying izzy was like a father figure to ed & then trying to connect that to ed killing his actual father is insane but specially, specially, when you remember that last episode stede & izzy had a pretty obvious moment where they came to an understanding about what it's like to be in love with the same man

that's not the kind of conversation and look you share with your ex's father figure. It's the one you share with your ex's ex while you're both still in love with him

Then the episode before that they kept cutting from stede&ed having sex to izzy singing a love song?

And the episode before that izzy stuttered and hesitantly asked stede what ed's been saying about him??

I know found families can have parental figures whom you may still feel a sexual and/or romantic attraction to, but at no point did either season ever show such a relationship between the two. I guess if you want to reach for it you could say that in early S1 there are times when izzy tries to look out for ed & guide him but even stede (fucking stede) clocks them as 'old married couple nearing the final stages of their divorce'

You could on a technicality apply the 'mentor dies at the end' trope to izzy but that's only if you assume that izzy's somewhat significantly older than ed and so probably looked out for ed at some point when they were working under hornigold together, which again is never shown in their dynamic (the only mention we get of it is through stede but I'm almost certain that most of what stede said was just him buttering up izzy to get him to train stede)

I feel like rather than 'father-figure/mentor dies at the end' it gives more 'even as we try to move on our existences are inseparably linked to each other and you're the last part of my old life that needs to die before I can finally be free to change and we both know that, even as it hurts' Yeah yeah izzy deserved to live a happy life away from blackbeard's influence the same way ed deserves to live a happy life away from izzy's (and I really wish he could have) but they've been unhealthily connected from the beginning (much more obvious in S2 seeing how neither of them could bare to get rid of the other's body) and it makes sense that eventually that's the trope & ending izzy fell into

point being:

david jenkins, sir, i respect your writing and love your show but that was absolutely NOT what was going on there

Izzy wanted to get fucked nasty but Ed's a bottom so it never worked out

[forlix]

i don’t know what the fuck to think or feel. heart feeling so heavy