#not following the narrative you created should be a crime

[lootkey]

Rewatching The 100 bc after reading Fourth Wing all I can picture for Xaden is S1 Bellamy and I had forgotten 1. How feral I am for Bellarke and 2. How much fucking narrative was spoiled for them in the later seasons

[marlshroom]

came to the fucked up realization after finishing gravity falls again last night the parallels of the dream bubble bill made for mabel and the literal state of delusion he keeps himself in.

in the book of bill on the page where bill cipher describes how he figured out a way to manipulate her into giving him the rift, it says:

"Summers ending, my guy. Ending to death, bro. She'd do anything to make it last just a day longer. Probably something RASH and OUT OF CHARACTER, even!"

as we know, mabel cannot handle the fact that she will be growing up. that the relationship with her brother is going to change. she is scared of high school.

bill then says "That was it. She'd never make a deal with me. But she'd make a deal with someone she believed could give her more time. The dream was done. I had her."

bill then creates the dream bubble for mabel, he makes every one of her dreams come true, a place where time is still and she can be a kid forever. a lie so great that she wont have to face the truth.

in journal 3 on one of the pages bill is writing in code, we see this:

[ID: "I ask you, why must[should] time only move forward? Why must cause preceded effect. Who voted on the law of physics."]

my friend helped me break down what bill means by this:

why can we only move forward in the 4th dimension of time. why does something have to make another thing happen, why must cause come before the effect. why cant you move backwards, in the other direction, change the decisions youve made.

how interpret this is bill asking why he is not able to back and stop what he did to his family. he says to ford that he tried and failed to undo the past.** why did him wanting people to acknowledge his advantages instead of suppress him lead to the destruction of his whole dimension?

**(i just want to point out that this is probably the time where bill is the MOST open to anybody, or at least the first. to his henchmaniacs he had been telling them that he liberated his dimension until the oracle discovered the truth. here, to ford, he got so much closer to telling the truth. he SHOWS ford the last atoms of his world. he says that it was destroyed by a monster, not that it was liberated! destroyed)

back to when bill says "I had her" about mabel, he had her cause he knew exactly what needed to happen to trap mabel in a delusion because it is exactly what he is doing to himself. creating a fake narrative of what happened to him, that he was vindicated in killing his whole dimension. only ever doing exactly what he wants because confronting the truth is too scary for him(good fucking lord). the morality page offers good insight into this too.

i am actually just going to quote the whole page and highlight the important part. it speaks for itself really

"THE POINT IS it's[morality] is a very flexible concept! But parents and presidents don't want you to know that, because then you might start asking other questions, like who put them in charge, anyway? So they cram your brain full of guilt and regrets for transgressing the laws that they just made up(the laws that they made to prevent the destruction of their dimension, regardless of if the law + the wrongful medication of a fucking baby triangle did any good to actually prevent it). Wouldn't it be nice if you could put all that baggage down? Quell the shame that follows you everywhere for a lifetime of crimes? MAKE THE SCREAMS FINALLY STOP? The good news is you CAN silence that annoying voice, and here's how!

DENIAL

Works 100% of the time in every situation. What you you mean there are people who disagree? I can confidently say there aren't!

RATIONALIZATION

If you can do it, you can justify it! "Truth" is open-source code and anyone can edit it anytime! Want to be like me? List 3 "evil" things and then 3 "reasons why they're actually good." You'll be rationalizing like Bill in no time!

DETACHMENT

Did you know 100% of your human cells die and are replaced every 7 years? That means that anything you did 7 years ago wasn't even you-it was some dead loser! You can't be held accountable for what a dead person did! What? You think this is just another form of rationalization? I DENY THAT!

THE BILL CIPHER DECISION METHOD!

Working over the eons, the voices in my head teamed up and worked out a foolproof method for making any decision in any situation.

DO WHATEVER I WANT."

ooooooooooooooooooh boy.

he is fully admitting here that he is living in a completely different really in order to justify doing whatever he wants. he gives mabel the tools to deny, to rationalize, to detach herself from the reality of it all. that time has to move forward. and he thinks it will work because it worked on himself.

but it doesn't work on mabel because she understands that she needs other people. shes vunerable, she lets people in, admits when shes wrong. and bill cant do that because it would destroy the fantasy he's created for himself.

[sorcerersandskillusers]

Fyodor and the Devil: Analysis of Fyodor's motives and role in the narrative

Asagiri has stated that he based Fyodor not on Dostoyevsky the author but on a specific scene from one of his books The Brothers Karamazov where Ivan Karamazov confronts “the devil” in his room.

(It's a really good book, you should read it if you have time. Also. fun fact, Fyodor and the devil wear the same hat, “His soft fluffy white hat was out of keeping with the season.”)

Having read the book and gone over this scene, I realized that this could be used to find out a lot more about Fyodor as a character than we see in the story, including a potential glimpse at his real motivations.

A bit of context for the scene. Ivan Kramazov is a clever but deeply trouble man who has struggling with the concept of God and rationalising him with the cruelty of humanity, at one point while very sick, Ivan starts seeing a man in his room who claims to be “the devil”. Their conversation is a fascinating look at morality and why evil exists in the world, and if you look at it closely it reveals a lot about the role of a “villain” in a story.

This line from “the devil” is really interesting to me, and seems to explain a lot about Fyodor’s character, as well as align perfectly with how Asagiri has described Fyodor in interviews:

Before time was, by some decree which I could never make out, I

was predestined 'to deny' and yet I am genuinely good-hearted and not at all inclined to negation.

'No, you must go and deny, without denial there's no criticism and what would a journal be without a column of criticism?' 

Without criticism it would be nothing but one 'hosannah.' But nothing but hosannah is not enough for life, the hosannah must be tried in the crucible of doubt and so on, in the same style. But I don't meddle in that, I didn't  create it, I am not answerable for it. Well, they've chosen their scapegoat, they've made me write the column of criticism and so life was made possible.

Basically the devil is saying that he was created because without evil then good means nothing, if everything was perfect then nothing would happen or change, life couldn’t exist, so he was forced to be that evil even though he never wanted to be.

This is so similar to how Fyodor is described in the BSD exposition 2020:

Fyodor is the antagonist, he is the villain of the story, that is the role he plays. This explains why he chooses to commit so many atrocities in the name of  “following God's plan”. It even connects to his line in The Dead Apple, and his ability name. He is both crime and punishment, as “crime” or sin originates with the devil, but it's also the devil who punishes sinners.

(I mean the title of the episode he is introduced in is literally “My Ill Deeds Are the Work of God” by committing evil acts he is fulfilling God's purpose for him.)

And if Fyodor is really based on “the devil” it's very likely he also either does or used to wish for release from this role that was assigned to him, but he knows that he cannot stray from his path or the story will cease to exist. My evidence for Fyodor wanting to be free of his mission is just one interaction, when he kills Karma.

Look at Fyodor's expression here, this is the only time in the entire series where we see him look truly sad. This isn't an act, there is no one there for him to trick, he simply says a quiet prayer for the life of a boy who's only purpose was to suffer and die.

This next part of “the devils” speech actually seems to fit very well for Dazai, it's interesting since he is the narrative foil to Fyodor and clearly is a very similar character.

We understand that comedy; I, for instance, simply ask for annihilation. No, live, I am told, for there'd be nothing without you.

If everything in the universe were sensible, nothing would happen. There would be no events without you, and there must be events. So against the grain I serve to produce events and do what's irrational because I am commanded to.

For all their indisputable intelligence,men take this farce as something serious, and that is their tragedy. They suffer, of course... but then they live, they live a real life, not a fantastic one, for suffering is life. Without suffering what would be the pleasure of it? It would be transformed into an endless church service; it would be holy, but tedious. But what about me? I suffer, but still, I don't live. I am x in an indeterminate equation. I am a sort of phantom in life who has lost all beginning and end, and who has even forgotten his own name. 

This ties perfectly into Dazai and Fyodor’s debate on the nature of God in the sky casino arc.

Dazai here points out that it's not perfection and harmony that make the world move, it's the irrational, it's the foolishness and stupidity of humans who charges into life making a million mistakes but always finding ways to fight on through it. Here Dazai and Fyodor represent the conflicting sides of “the devil” with Fyodor embodying his mission to drive the world and Dazai embodying his secret love for, and wish to join, humanity.

“I love men genuinely, I've been greatly calumniated! Here when I stay withyou from time to time, my life gains a kind of reality and that's what I like most of all. Yousee, like you, I suffer from the fantastic and so I love the realism of earth. Here, with you, everything is circumscribed, here all is formulated and geometrical, while we have nothing but indeterminate equations! I wander about here dreaming. I like dreaming. Besides, on earth I become superstitious. Please don't laugh, that's just what I like, to become superstitious. I adopt all your habits here: I've grown fond of going to the public baths, would you believe it?

And I go and steam myself with merchants and priests. What I dream of is becoming incarnate once for all and irrevocably in the form of some merchant's wife weighing eighteen stone, and of believing all she believes. My ideal is to go to church and offer a candle in simple-hearted faith, upon my word it is. Then there would be an end to my sufferings.”

“"Why not, if I sometimes put on fleshly form? I put on fleshly form and I take the consequences. Satan sum et nihil humanum a me alienum puto."*

* I am Satan, and deem nothing human alien to me.”

This piece from the devil feels like it could be a description of Dazai’s character, his wish above all else to find happiness and love as a human despite believing he is a demon. Both Dazai and Fyodor have strong ties to the Devil, both of them are often described as demonic or inhuman, with emphasis placed on the darkness of their souls and the isolation they feel due to their minds.

But the difference between them is how they dealt with it, Fyodor chose to embrace it and fully commit to his role in the story as the ultimate evil for the greater good, but Dazai has always shown a fasciation with humans and has spent his life trying to connect to them and find meaning in his existence.

Finally, let's look at what we can learn about Fyodor’s motivation. Fyodor is the villain, he is the final obstacle the protagonist has to overcome, he is the driving force behind so much of Atsushi’s life and the reason so much of the series has played out at all. He sent Shibusawa to torture Atsushi as a child, he was an informant to the guild who put the bounty on Atsushi making the mafia turn on him, he was involved in the guild invasion, and obviously he was the master mind behind cannibalism and Decay of Angles.

If he is aware of his position as the antagonist, then he also is probably aware Atsushi is the protagonist, he knew he was the “envy of all ability users” after all, so he knows Atsushi has some significance to the world as a whole.

Atsushi is also the “guide to the book” which is seemingly Fyodor’s end goal, so even though Fyodor doesn’t seem to be focused on Atsushi, he has been indirectly influencing his whole journey up to this point. This also explains why Fyodor is only moving actively now, because the protagonist has appeared and his role as the villain can finally be fulfilled and he, like “the devil” can finally get the “annihilation” he asked for. Hence, Fyodor’s true goal is to erase himself from the narrative.

There is actually quite a lot of evidence for this. The obvious part is that Fyodor wants to rid the world of ability users while he himself is an ability user, he cannot exist in his perfect world. 

Then there’s the fact that in the Dead Apple, Fyodor calls himself “crime” if Fyodor is “crime” or “sin” then a world free of sin would not contain him at all

Even when Fyodor talks about sin, he says how humans are easily manipulated into killing each other, while he constantly manipulates characters into killing each other, he is the cause of the sin he fights.

A really strong bit of evidence is this interview with Asagiri and Harukawa

Not only does Asagiri reiterate Fyodors role as the person who moves the story, Harukawa specifically mentions that Fyodor might be trying to create a world without ability users because he thought it was a “bad thing to do” aka the action a villain would take that would lead to a hero stopping them.

“Dos-san is the biggest villain in the story so far, but I have continued to draw him with spaced out eyes that are neither righteous nor evil for a long time. The only time I drew his eyes completely white was when he said he would create a world without skill users. It was because, in reality, we would decide what is evil or not by our own scales, but I wasn't sure if he himself was doing it because he thought that was a bad thing to do.”

This also connects to how Fyodor was able to understand Gogol when no one else could, Gogol is chooses to fight against the way the world is to prove to himself that he truly is free. Fyodor, who is bound to play a part in a narrative, would understand that feeling and that longing to be truly free.

To be clear, I don’t think that Fyodor is really a good person whose just been trapped in an awful position against his will, we see many times that Fyodor revels in his cruelty and enjoys killing and torturing others. Its the same with “the devil” in the book, although he hates the job he was given, he tells Ivan stories of the people he’s corrupted and seems very proud of himself for it.

My personal interpretation is that the sadistic zelot personality Fyodor displays is a mixture of a mask and a coping mechanism, kind of similar to Yosano developing a sadistic side to help her deal with the guilt of half killing people in order to heal them. I think it makes sense that after centuries of cruelty and manipulation a person would become detached and stop really caring about the lives he destroys.

This analysis is partially unfinshed but I wanted to post it now and see what other people think of it.

[absolutehomosexuals]

The Infamous "Durge Is a Man" Essay

I - INTRODUCTION

There's one simple question that led us to developing this theory: "would Bhaal want a female heir?"

Bhaal created Durge to be his ideal successor: the hand who would've reaped death in the world, conquering it in His name.

Every detail we get about Durge's lore is tied to this objective, the entire purpose of Bhaal's creation.

The cult is obviously shown to us as patriarchal, which is hinted at from the sole fact they worship a male deity: the argument may come off as silly at first, since one could argue Gods do not understand nor care for the concepts of gender.

It would be a valid counterpoint, if it wasn't for the fact Bhaal used to be a human, having navigated the world as a fully grown man before he eventually became a God.

If we believe he created Durge in his ideal image, it seems much more intuitive for his offspring to be male.

II - THE MATTER OF SUCCESSION

We must note that Bhaal's plans heavily rely (as we can read in Durge's "diary" tab) on reproduction ; e.g "siring lots of Bhaalspawn".

This alone isn't coded as one sex or the other but, if we think of it in terms of convenience, a female heir wouldn't be your first choice for the task: women can only gestate one child per year and conceive in very specific windows of time within their cycle, while men can potentially impregnate countless women in the same time span and not suffer any physical disadvantages during gestation.

We should also consider women tend to develop a bond with their newborn and the latter needs to rely on them for survival during the first few months of their life, while a man:

1. has no such obligations from a social point view (especially in a medieval context, where bastard children were the norm)

2. isn't strictly needed by the child for survival, biologically speaking.

I doubt Bhaal was expecting his heir to keep track of her cycle, gestate for nine months with all the drawbacks that come with it, give birth risking death and spend the following months caring for a newborn – all of this, on repeat for years if not centuries.

"But he's a God, he could potentially speed up the process!"

Technically true, but why would he go through such trouble, if he could craft his ideal child as a male and avoid complications?

The game itself seems to agree with this theory, since you get the "Bhaal's stallion" line regardless of your Durge's gender, in one of the bad endings.

We could also consider the idea that reproduction = power, "spreeding the seed", to be a typically patriarchal concept.

Bhaal himself isn't fond of the idea of raising children, as he let Durge be raised by an adoptive family – a "regular" one no less, meaning he didn't even concern himself with choosing one.

III - IN-UNIVERSE MYSOGINY

There are many aspects of the religion that seem to glorify manhood, and for its leader to be a woman (by Bhaal's choice, no less) seems inconsistent.

Let's think of the infamous blessing granted to Bhaal's favourites, the Ecstasy of Murder, which basically consists in a pseudo prostatic orgasm.

Then we consider the presence of predominantly-male sexual crimes, both coming from Durge and other important figures within the cult.

We cannot deny necrophilia, for functional reasons, is extremely uncommon amongst women: necrophilic acts are typically carried out by penetrating a dead body, as it's almost the only pleasurable act you can perform on a corpse ; Durge being a known necrophiliac pre-lobotomy could be one of the many hints the character is meant to be read as male.

Not to mention the horrendous way in which Bhaalist female characters are treated in-universe, between Sarevok sexually abusing his daughter (and this concept being treated as completely normal by the narrative, as far as we know of) and Orin being constantly belittled.

We never hear of any male cultists undergoing the same treatment, meaning abusing women is the norm amongst Bhaal's faithful – yet again, a telltale sign of a patriarchal religion.

"But Orin isn't mistreated because of her sex, she's mistreated because she's not the true heir!"

Orin is, indeed, not Bhaal's biological daughter: she's related to Him by blood, but as Durge himself says, her blood is "diluted".

However, while he acknowledges she's not his biological sister, he still addresses her as such in multiple sources, meaning the cult leader himself doesn't care about her actual origins.

She's constantly portrayed as someone who gets talked down to, cast aside and her beliefs are harshly criticized both by Durge and others influential members such as Sarevok.

For Larian to choose a woman to fill this role could have been accidental, but we must admit the symbolism is quite clear.

Orin interprets murder as a form of art, while her Bhaalist peers frequently accuse of her misunderstanding her own faith, considering her too immature to lead the flock.

She's the only Bhaalist female character we're shown as remarkable, and she's coincidentally used as an example of someone the cult does not respect ; she's even biologically related to Bhaal and yet, she had to seize power by force.

IV - ROMANTIC SUBTEXTS

Another interesting matter are the characters commonly paired with Durge in fanworks: Durgetash and Durgestarion are the most popular romantic pairings according to ao3, and we cannot blame the fandom for catching up on the subtext.

Durge's "admiration" (as he calls it himself) towards Gortash is viewed as controversial and arises suspicion in-universe, to the point he feels the need to apologize to his Father and repent for an implicit sin.

While it would be scandalous to fraternize with Gortash even in a platonic matter – he's practically the leader of the rival cult –, the emphasis put on justifying their interactions has been interpreted by fans as romantic subtext.

The letter in which Durge addresses the issue is titled "Letter for Forgiveness", despite Gortash only being mentioned at the beginning, while the rest of the letter focuses on different topics entirely.

Right after expressing guilt for the way he views Gortash, Durge proceeds to repeat Bhaal's plan and promises to follow it, stressing that he would have made his Father proud regardless.

The letter overall comes off as an attempt to justify being attracted to Gortash and reassuring Bhaal that it wouldn't come in the way of their plans, as it would pose an enormous threat otherwise.

Durge being attracted to Gortash – if we choose to interpret him as a man – would come with a handful of important challenges: first of all, sympathizing with the 'enemy', implying Durge could abandon the idea of betraying him or even allow Gortash to do the same to him.

Second of all, being capable of such vulnerability that would come in the way of being a sentient weapon: a killing machine isn't supposed to feel pity, let alone experience something as foolish as forbidden love.

And thirdly, for Bhaal's heir to prefer the company of men is simply a disgrace, as it would come in the way of reproduction and possibly undermine his public image.

While all of this may have not been meant as a homosexual allegory, the fact you can find the Letter for Forgiveness on Durge's corpse if you play as Tav, still comes off as "bringing a secret to the grave".

Not to mention the note at the end of the letter, written by another cultist, reading: "Ha! Orin was right about her sibling." which is clearly a jab at what we mentioned above.

When you go to confront Orin in Act III (as Durge) about the fact she has been following you around town, she replies: "The little lordling has been whispering in your ears? He always knew how to tumble and twist your mind matter, leaving you knotted in his chords."

The matter of Durge's attraction to Gortash is seen as something silly and shameful at the same time: it's an open secret cult members dare to joke about, because they find it ridiculous.

If a hypothetical female heir of Bhaal had the slightest possibility of reproducing with the Chosen of Bane, I'm pretty sure they wouldn't find it as humorous – they find it hilarious because it's taboo, a powerful demigod developing a "school crush" on a male ally.

We should also talk about some of the in-game implications about Gortash, such as being someone who possibly "slept his way to the top": managing to charm and daze a much more powerful man on purpose sounds surprisingly in-character.

What we find even more interesting are the implications that come with Durgestarion, a pairing the writers are openly fond of.

We know both characters were characterized by the same writer, the latter going out of his way to include personalized romance interactions between the two: unlike other characters, romancing Astarion as Durge gives the player access to tons of new dialogue lines and greetings, sometimes making for a completely new experience compared to romancing him with a regular Tav.

Some hints may point to Durge being the "canonical" romance for Astarion, as many fans have speculated ; while one may disagree with that sentiment, we must admit it's not far fetched.

If we consider all of Astarion's canonical past relationships (meaning, the few ones he actually deems important and genuine) were with men, and the emphasis put on Durge's "admiration" towards Gortash + the incessant pressure Bhaal puts on him to reproduce, the thought of these characters romancing each other in an alternative timeline actually sounds liberating.

Some Durge-specific lines Astarion says during his romance arc seem to be aimed at a male character, rather than sounding gender neutral: the first example that comes to mind is "Are you alright now, or is today a 'I will wed you with a delicate veil of blood blooming over your white curls' kind of day?"

Astarion sarcastically references Durge "wedding him", thus putting the player in a stereotipical "groom" role from the start, with the veil resembling the one brides typically wear during the cerimony.

If we consider all other aspects mentioned in this theory, the line reads as somewhat... male-coded.

If we want to be truly insane about this theory – and of course, we do – , we could even add a "gay allegory" element to the equation.

A vampire and the spawn of an evil deity, excluded members of society who'd usually feel a compulsion to hide, are implied to fall in love by the narrative.

V - ACTING CHOICES

Finally, we come to the voice actor: while a specific actor was chosen to play the character and is regarded as the iconic Durge VA, Larian didn't concern themselves with choosing a female voice actor to include the possibility of a female Durge, which is why we can only hear his intro in Neil Roberts' voice.

VI - CONCLUSION

With all of this taken into account, a female Durge seems to be an after-thought, if not directly a fantasy or a headcanon that the game gives you the possibility to play out.

The original narrative, as we can see, best accomodates a male character.

[hayatheauthor]

How To Get Away With Murder Part Two: Writing Murder Mysteries

Murder mysteries are possibly one of the most complicated genres in fiction. Unlike other genres, authors need to create a very comprehensive backstory and worldbuilding that seamlessly ties into the present story while also creating intriguing characters that move the plot forward. As an author, you need to weave a complex web of clues, red herrings, and twists that ultimately lead to the big reveal, all while maintaining the integrity of the story.

Writing a good murder mystery is a daunting task, but with the right tools and techniques, you can create a gripping tale that keeps your readers on the edge of their seats. In this blog post, I'll be sharing my personal tips and insights on how to craft a compelling murder mystery that will leave your readers guessing until the very end.

Establish The Rules 

Before you jump into your murder mystery it’s important to first set the scene and establish the ‘rules’ for your murder mystery. Your readers need to know what’s at stake here. Who was murdered? What is the most likely reason for their murder? Why is this particular character investigating their murder? You need to set up a clear foundation for your story. 

Authors should also attempt to establish some semblance of a ‘stage’ for where the story will take place. If a character was murdered in their hotel room the hotel itself would likely be the ‘stage’ for your book’s murder mystery. This is where the detective will live and uncover clues until the end of the book. 

Once you have a clear story and setting, move on to the characters and their role in the murder. Who is the investigative figure? Do they have to face any obstacles or follow certain rules while investigating? A great example of this would be Pip’s legal restrictions in A Good Girl’s Guide To Murder. Her position as a teenager significantly limited her investigative methods. 

Plant The Seeds 

Foreshadowing is the key to a good murder mystery. You need to start foreshadowing as soon as possible. As a writer, you need to plant subtle clues throughout your narrative that will keep your readers engaged and guessing.

But it's important to strike a balance between too much foreshadowing, which can make the plot predictable, and too little, which can make the conclusion feel like it came out of nowhere. Start foreshadowing early on in your story, and use a mix of subtle hints and more overt clues to keep your readers engaged without giving away the ending. Remember, the best foreshadowing is often invisible until the reader looks back on the story as a whole.

The Repitition Rule 

Writers are often advised to repeat foreshadowing at least three times to help readers remember it. While this can be a helpful guideline, it's important to use your own judgment and avoid overdoing it. After all, if you repeat the same clues too often, you risk telegraphing the ending and ruining the suspense. 

Instead, aim for a mix of subtle and overt foreshadowing that will keep readers engaged without giving too much away. Remember, the goal is to keep readers guessing until the very end.

Misdirect The Reader 

In order to keep readers engaged and invested in the mystery, it's important to misdirect them from time to time. This means leading them down one path only to reveal that it was a dead end, or presenting a red herring that turns out to be unrelated to the actual crime. 

There are many ways to accomplish this, from introducing false suspects and motives to using clever misdirection to steer readers away from the truth. One effective technique is to present conflicting evidence that suggests multiple possible solutions, forcing readers to constantly reassess their theories and stay engaged with the story. 

However, it's important to avoid overdoing it or making the misdirection too obvious. You want readers to feel challenged and intrigued, not frustrated or misled. Ultimately, the goal is to keep readers guessing until the very end, when all is revealed and the pieces fall into place.

Add Depth To Your Characters 

Developing your characters is crucial in murder mysteries. Not only does it make them more interesting and relatable, but it also helps to create a sense of connection and investment in the story. Make sure each character, even minor ones, have a distinct personality and backstory that ties into the plot.

When it comes to suspects, be sure to give each one a clear motive and opportunity to commit the crime. Think about their relationships with the victim and other characters, and how those dynamics could have played a role in the murder. Consider adding red herrings, false leads, and hidden secrets to make the investigation more complex and engaging.

Adding depth to your characters also helps create an emotional connection. This is especially important for the victim, you need to show your readers why they should care about this character’s death. 

In A Good Girl’s Guide To Murder everyone’s illtreatment towards Sal’s family made the readers empathetic and had us rooting for Pip. It is important to establish some semblance of this empathy, or any other emotion such as anger, for your victims. 

Use The Setting To Your Advantage 

In a murder mystery, the setting can play a crucial role in providing clues and red herrings. Think about the location where the murder took place, and how it could provide hints about the killer's identity or motives. Perhaps there's a hidden object or a peculiar feature of the setting that only the killer would know about. 

On the other hand, you can also use the setting to throw off the reader's suspicion, by including false clues or misdirections. For example, a character may have a motive to commit the murder in a particular location, but it turns out that they were actually somewhere else at the time. Overall, the setting is a powerful tool that can enhance the suspense and intrigue of a murder mystery, so make sure to use it to your advantage.

In addition to using the setting to provide clues and red herrings, it's also important to use it to create a mood and atmosphere that supports the murder mystery genre. Consider using a dark and moody setting, like a creepy old mansion or a foggy alleyway, to create tension and suspense. 

You can also use the setting to create obstacles for your characters to overcome, like a hidden trapdoor. By making the setting a key part of your story, you can enhance the overall experience for your readers and make your murder mystery even more memorable.

Tie Up Loose Ends 

Tying up loose ends is an essential part of writing a murder mystery. The reader expects a satisfying conclusion, and that can only happen when all loose ends are resolved. It's important to address any unanswered questions and resolve any plot holes.

Plot holes can be frustrating for readers and can ruin the entire reading experience. As a writer, it's your responsibility to make sure that there are no unresolved issues in your story. If there are any inconsistencies or plot holes, they need to be addressed and resolved.

To ensure that all loose ends are tied up, it's helpful to create a list of all the questions that need to be answered by the end of the story. Go through your manuscript multiple times, checking to make sure that each question is answered and that all loose ends are resolved.

By taking the time to tie up loose ends and address any plot holes, you can create a satisfying conclusion that will leave your readers feeling impressed with your attention to detail.

Practice Makes Perfect 

To write a good murder mystery, you need to practice. Writing a successful mystery requires a skill and experience, and you can't expect to get it right the first time. Practice by reading other murder mysteries and taking note of how other authors structure their stories, how they use clues and foreshadowing, and how they misdirect the reader.

When you're writing your own murder mystery, don't be afraid to make mistakes. It's common for writers to encounter plot holes or inconsistencies in their story. The important thing is to recognize these mistakes and fix them as soon as possible. One way to do this is to get feedback from other writers or beta readers.

Remember, the more you practice, the better you'll become. Don't get discouraged if your first attempts aren't perfect. Keep writing, keep learning, and keep honing your craft. Eventually, you'll be able to write a murder mystery that will keep your readers guessing until the very end.

I hope this blog on how to get away with murder and write a murder mystery will help you in your writing journey. Be sure to comment any tips of your own to help your fellow authors prosper, and follow my blog for new blog updates every Monday and Thursday.  

Looking For More Writing Tips And Tricks? 

Are you an author looking for writing tips and tricks to better your manuscript? Or do you want to learn about how to get a literary agent, get published and properly market your book? Consider checking out the rest of Haya’s book blog where I post writing and marketing tools for authors every Monday and Thursday

[raisedbyheathens]

So I know in various places there has been discourse about Gordon Porlock not surviving the Hypersleep process. And the "he's a bag of quince jelly on ice" people are incredibly wrong and should feel bad.

Gordon not waking up is a narrative dead end. Gordon dies and then... what? Tell me. Other than the initial gut punch of losing an MC what purpose does it serve? Gordon is gone, and Warren most likely either shuts down entirely or runs. Where to? He knows nothing in this new world. Runs or lashes out and who's he going to lash out at? Aubrey? Clive? The system? How. Tell me how any of this works or is compelling.

Gordon survives and comes out of the pod having lost his memories of Warren. HERE'S a rich vein to tap. Especially if the pod leans into a romantic interpretation of Warren and Gordon's relationship. Does Warren tell Gordon everything that happened, does Warren tell Gordon about his crime? Does Warren push too hard to try and get his friend/beloved back? Then you end up with an Arthur/Yellow situation where that may simply drive Gordon away. It's a more interesting narrative seam, that opens possible plot lines about memory and the past and who we are and what we choose to carry with us and who we are if those things are removed. It asks the question of Warren and more broadly of us- if someone you loved had forgotten the worst thing about you, would you tell them about it? Would they ever really know you if you didn't? Does anyone ever really know anyone else. All of that is interesting to think about and would still be starkly lit by the unflinching spotlight on corporate greed and unfettered, immoral science

Gordon survives completely intact. Another interesting set of paths to explore Now you have narrative possibilities of Warren and Gordon trying to learn how to be human again together. In an whole new world, new context trying to heal but largely adrift in a future they cannot possibly understand. What do THEY do? Does Warren run, like he has always done? Does Gordon follow him? Just walk away together and go be friends or romantic or other and leave cryonics and the fighting behind? Is that a happy ending? Maybe? But it also asks whether we ever really escape our patterns. That even if we are cut off from the circumstances and world that has shaped us, once we are molded there is no hope for change or growth. Maybe they stay and fight, and is it fair to ask these two men who shouldered so much of the initial emotional and physical burden of creating cryotech to shoulder more pain to help fix mistakes they themselves were deeply injured by? It asks does fair matter?

Anyway, Gordon is definitely going to wake up and all the people on twitter gleefully hoping he's goo in a pod are mean spirited sure, but mostly just wrong

now what happens WHEN Gordon wakes up is mostly likely going to murder me, but he almost certainly will wake up

[chaifootsteps]

Hi hi! It's me, Concerned Anon (Directed to the Anon who had expressed feeling threatened.). The doc I created is NOT meant to harass people. I am fine with regular people in the fandom, it's extended to people like DJ and the like. I scrolled through the Doc and there's nothing of the sorts threatening people to off themselves.

If that's the case, then I would remove it. This is towards Chai as I treat him as a source. I feel like most people assume the Doc has content that's "Extreme as all hell" when in reality my language is only directed at people who commit actual crimes, I am not that extreme with my beliefs and anyone who name drops me on twitter for "threatening behavior" is only spreading false narratives and this ask is meant to clarify some things.

I do not care for the tame side of the fandom, as long as your not doing anything shitty and bad then it's fine by me.

The beginning of the Doc has stated numerous times to not harass others or send any hate. Hence: "If you are reading this with the full intent to harass anyone in the critic community or even outside of, then don’t. Especially if you follow Viv’s work and worship her. This will only further add more to the document and cause more issues than not. This document is meant to inform and educate/help others and make sure that Viv doesn’t get away with anything, as much as you like to not listen to what has been said, just act civilly and don’t act like it’s the end of the world because someone says VivziePop’s writing is bullshit. This will also serve as an open letter of some sorts, a walking, living, reading example of what the fanbase has done, that if VivziePop tries anything, we can show this document. You can still like her work and be critical of it, no one’s forcing you to not like it. "

The end of the Doc has a harsh message to the more "messed up side" as usual, most of us cannot control who comes to who, but we can also tell people to NOT harass others.

I do not intend to spread hate, if anything I am harsh on people like DJ, Dani and the creator.

My blog is not a Critic Space, nor do I intend for it to be that way. People who clarify this post as me being "harsh" hasn't read the full doc and are going off what Fans are saying.

I am simply only harsh to people who harass others for opinions, Dox, send death threats etc. Anything as a result of my Doc is my bad. But it's not in bad faith. I am simply doing my due diligence of cleaning up the Fandom, and if you haven't done anything wrong then I see no point in worrying.

I know this ask targeted to Chai, but this is for everyone whose worried. I am not some crazy "Critic" I am just someone whose Mentally Ill, with several disabilities who have been mistreated by the fandom and keeping archives.

By all accounts I am a normal human being. I just want to post Dragon Ball, not be called someone who wants to "hurt others" (trust me, the last time I did I ended up in the loony bin. I literally had the FBI shown up to my place."

So yeah, Doc isn't meant to sent any harassment, and if there's people doing that, cut that out. I am not dealing with this shit right now, as I already got alot on my hand.

I once again want to apologize if my "posts" causes issues. Not my intentions.

--Cooler's Malewife, Anon

Passing this along even though I have absolutely no idea what doc you're referring to. It sounds fair to people who enjoy the shows though, which is the way it should be.

[saintsenara]

Ooh more about the subtext around James/Sirius? I’ve always read the text this way too!

thank you for the ask anon!

this question could have been prompted by any number of posts i’ve made, because i am a great proponent of the idea that...

unrequited prongsfoot is canon. 

why?

i’m so glad you asked!

let’s begin with a small caveat which - regrettably - involves some engagement with discourse.

the things created within fandom aren’t real - an individual fic can’t cause actual, material harm to a reader, even if it contains tropes that would be harmful or distressing if they happened in that reader’s real life; an author’s use of certain tropes or interest in certain characters is not indicative of their actual morals and values in real life; thought crimes are not real crimes - but fanfiction is produced by human beings who are themselves products of the societies and communities in which we all live, and these societies and communities all have flaws and failings.

which is to say, those of us who prefer to read male friendships like james and sirius’ as romantic do need to be aware that, no matter how enlightened on gender and its foibles we think ourselves to be, we are nonetheless influenced as modern humans by a modern tendency to discourage platonic physical and emotional closeness between men - especially straight men - on the grounds that two men having this sort of relationship is inherently queer and, in being queer, implicitly sexual [an understanding of queerness which is another powerful societal influence on our thought, even if we know we don’t agree with it].

we should also be aware that reading a friendship as defining and life-altering as james and sirius’ as romantic gives weight to a modern tendency to prioritise romantic love - and one of its expected outcomes, the love of parents for their biological children - over platonic love, and to regard people for whom romantic love is not a priority as not properly having achieved the milestones of adulthood, nor as properly fulfilled, adored, or satisfied.

everything which follows here, then, can be taken to refer just as validly to a purely platonic relationship between james and sirius if the reader prefers. and, indeed, my view is that this is how the canon narrative wants the reader to understand james saw the relationship... 

but i also think that the canonical text wants us to infer that, for sirius, his relationship with james was one of unrequited romantic love.

it must be said, however, that the narrative doesn’t show this explicitly. of course, it emphasises sirius and james’ compatibility, their similar personalities, their shared affection for each other, and a certain element of codependency [the thought of these two boys, unable to be apart even for a detention without talking through their mirrors! my heart breaks!], but it also sets up these shared elements as - broadly - fraternal: sirius is quasi-adopted by the potters; harry thinks of him and james as like fred and george, at least until he sees snape’s memories in order of the phoenix. when sirius speaks to harry about james, the profundity of his love for him is obvious, and on the two occasions when we see them physically together [snape’s worst memory and the prince’s tale] it’s clear that each is the primary driving force behind the other’s decisions. but we have nothing which indicates unambiguously that sirius’ feelings for james were romantic.

until we dive into a bit of narratology. because the text does do something to suggest that its intention is for sirius’ relationship with james to be read as non-platonic.

and that something is its use of narrative mirrors.

the harry potter series loves assigning its characters to narrative pairs - harry and voldemort are the obvious one; ron and draco malfoy are the one which deserves more attention - and it assigns to sirius a narrative mirror whose own story is one of unrequited romantic love...

severus snape.

sirius and snape are incredibly similar, personality-wise. they also serve identical narrative roles, in that they function as the guides who lead harry through an emotional arc which begins in earnest in prisoner of azkaban and concludes in deathly hallows, in which he sheds his childish, black-and-white view of his parents and comes to regard them as real, flawed, and complex people. harry does this with james in order of the phoenix - after the realisation that he was a bully stops the hero-worshipping which defines his earlier attitude towards his father - with sirius as his guide [sirius is then killed off the second this narrative sub-arc is complete]. he then does it with lily - who spends the earlier books as secondary in importance to james in her son’s mind - in half-blood prince and deathly hallows, in which snape [via the proxies of slughorn, the discipline of potions, his textbook, his patronus, and his memories] serves as his guide, until the fact that lily is the key to the whole mystery is revealed just before harry sacrifices himself to save the world.

in the course of this, it comes to be revealed that each of them considers their life to be defined by their relationship with and love for one half of the pair of james and lily [although the series hides this in snape’s case - making it look as though he is also motivated purely by his antagonistic relationship with james - right up until the last moment]. their mirrored relationships with harry - while the idea that sirius is incapable of distinguishing him from his father is an invention of the films - is also driven fundamentally by their relationship with one of the two halves of his parents.

sirius and snape’s mirrored motivation-by-love is shown most clearly in their identical approach to guilt and grief, the two things which overarchingly drive their individual character arcs across the seven-book canon [or three, if you’re sirius - rip king].

both sirius and snape indirectly trigger the death of the person they love - and, let’s be frank, if we’re going to excoriate snape for reporting the prophecy to voldemort, exactly the same level of ire needs to be reserved for sirius and his plan to switch secret keepers [what we could do instead, of course, is recognise the life-altering tragedy of making this kind of mistake, which we all have to hope we never experience ourselves, and treat the lads with compassion] - but it’s clear in canon that neither accepts the idea that their involvement was, in fact, indirect. sirius openly tells harry that he considers himself to have "as good as" cast the killing curse on james and lily; snape rejects dumbledore’s [back-handed] comfort that james and lily’s deaths were caused by "putting their trust in the wrong person" by wishing to die himself.

wracked by guilt and hollowed out by grief, both of them then decide to punish themselves in an effort - one which, i think, they both consider futile, since they clearly regard their sins as too great to be redeemed - to atone for causing james and lily’s deaths. both of them do this by subjecting themselves to the pain and humiliation of imprisonment.

in sirius’ case, obviously, this is literal. we know from canon that he refuses to profess his innocence at any point during his show trial - and why would he, when he considers himself to be guilty? - and that he remains in azkaban for twelve years, despite possessing the means to escape before then. he leaves the prison only to attempt the one action which he thinks will redeem him in james’ eyes: murdering peter pettigrew.

in snape’s case, the prison is a metaphor [foucault just sat up]. snape entombs himself both at hogwarts - not a place he seems to have been particularly happy - and in spinner’s end, allows dumbledore to repeatedly humiliate him, and risks his life as a spy as a means of self-flagellation. like sirius, he fails to profess his innocence - through ordering dumbledore to tell nobody of his true allegiance - because he considers himself to be guilty. he leaves the self-constructed cell in which he is skulking only when dead - when harry, who takes on the burden of fulfilling snape’s atonement himself by preparing to kill voldemort, starts screaming his true motivations in the dark lord’s face - although there's some implication in canon that dumbledore’s intention was for snape to end the series by attempting himself the one action which he thinks will redeem him in lily’s eyes: murdering voldemort.

[after all, why does dumbledore say to harry at king’s cross that his aim was for snape to control the elder wand if he wasn’t hoping he’d use it to give the dark lord his death blow?]

snape and sirius mirror each other exactly in their response to the death of the person they love. we can justifiably assume, then, that we are intended by the text to read that love as identical in type. 

jkr has been very clear that snape’s relationship with lily is one of unrequited romantic love. we obviously don’t have to accept this in our own readings or in the way we write the characters in our own work - i love a queer snape sacrificing everything for his platonic best friend as much as the next girl - but we do have to acknowledge it as the doylist text’s stated intention. it stands to reason, then, that the text’s intention is for us to regard the mirror-image of snape’s love for lily - sirius’ love for james - as romantic as well.

or, unrequited prongsfoot is canon.

[verdemoun]

the parallels between characters oh my goodness gracious

charles and micah, kieran and sadie, ough

I LOVE CHARACTER PARALLELS

you can definitely draw parallels between Charles and Micah, joining the gang at similar times, both becoming a voice and confidant of one of the old guard, ect but you got me thinking so bad about other parallels. Before I continue, petition to rename red dead redemption to dead mom redemption.

Arthur & Micah: On paper, they are the same person. Both were raised by single fathers after losing their mothers young in non-descript ways. Both their fathers were outlaws, who assumedly died due to their criminal activity. For both Micah and Arthur, being an outlaw became the only option for them because, tragically, it was all they knew and the only way of life they had ever witnessed. Both would find Dutch van der Linde, and eventually have their loyalty to Dutch van der Linde be what lead to their demises. When Micah rocked up and I can imagine Arthur immediately recognizing 'it's me but worse', and it's probably where his idea that Dutch could change/save Micah came from: resulting in him arguing less about Micah's presence in the gang despite obviously not liking Micah from Chapter 1.

Charles & John: Again, characters that could be doubles on paper. Both were raised by single fathers, and both lost their fathers to alcoholism before they were 12 years old. Both would turn to crime as a means to survive, with no one else in the world they were safe to turn to. Both would live a life of relative isolation, for the most part experiencing the most cruel aspects of human nature, before meeting Dutch van der Linde and gang. Both would form unique, powerful bonds with Arthur. Both, possibly due to that overlapping upbringing, would be far less trusting of Dutch's ideals. Both John and Charles are amongst the first to question Dutch: his motives, his 'plan', what they are trying to accomplish and what Dutch would sacrifice to be there. Both would survive 1899, but never forget what Arthur meant to them: willing to abandon their own ideals for the opportunity to kill Micah in revenge for Arthur's death in 1907. Both would consider this the end of their gunslinging ways, with John returning to his family and Charles leaving for Canada to seek a family of his own inspired by John.

SADIE AND KIERAN SHOULD HAVE HAD MORE SCREEN TIME TOGETHER. GOD. THEY SHOULD'VE BEEN FRIENDS AND HAD LIMP WRISTED CONVERSATIONS ABOUT COLMMMMM.

Kieran and Sadie are more like foils than parallels but both had their lives rapidly change trajectory due to encounters with Colm, followed by encounters with the VDLs. Both were forced to join the VDLs as a means of escaping Colm, and despite immeasurable factors against them found something akin to happiness with the VDLs only to have it ripped from them again- Kieran through death and Sadie through the downfall of the VDLs. The main difference is that their time with the VDLs was spent at different points of their own narrative arcs, Sadie seeking revenge and Kieran seeking redemption.

All the characters and their relationships are so interesting in terms of the overarching narrative of red dead redemption, aka a character redeeming themselves for acts of violence and revenge they are trying to create a life separate from only to still meet their demises due to that inescapable past.

Kieran is Wish-version Arthur. Kieran's defense of Colm in Paying a Social Call is almost exactly how Arthur defends Dutch to John in The Battle of Shady Belle, acknowledging their leader's wrong but making excuses for it. Kieran literally says riding with the VDLs is an attempt to make amends for the wrongs he's done as an O'Driscoll!! He incidentally abandons gunslinging in favor of the more peaceful life of tending horses and helping out within camp (which btw when Arthur does it are honor-boosting activities). He's softspoken and gentle in the way Arthur can't afford to be until Chapter 6, where Arthur's the one trying to made amends to both the debtors and the Downes. The only time he canonically fires a gun is to save Arthur's life. He's just a high honor guy trying to live a better life - only for that past of being an O'Driscoll to lead to his demise. He only exists to foreshadow no matter how much Arthur and John are able to redeem themselves, their fates have already been determined by their past and choices they made to survive. They're all so doomed by the narrative.

[evilios]

Threads That Bind was my first introduction to Kika Hatzopoulou's writing, and a pleasant one. It's a refreshing novelty among mythology-inspired books as it features an otherwise untouched by them genre: a fantasy crime novel.

Hatzopoulou's writing is dynamic and flavorful, she's very talented at creating action sequences and fast-paced, intense interactions. Her text is heavily inspired by different concepts of cultural and mythological landscapes of Greece, Ancient and modern: the main heroine, Io, is a descendant of a long line of Fates-born capable of seeing and cutting threads of one's life and all the things dear to the person. Alongside her equally powerful sisters, Thais and Ava, she's in the middle of all the action, uncovering the mystery of a spree of suspicious murders.

Io is a deeply sympathetic character that's easy to relate to due to her social standing and the deep personal, familial crises she is going through: grief and loss, growing apart with the family, finding your point in life, hoping for one day when things might get better. She's simply well-written and interesting to follow.

If you enjoy a fun and dynamic narrative built around the concepts of predetermined fate, destiny and justice, sisterhood and family, otherness, and free will, then I'd heavily recommend this book.

No major plot spoilers, some things I want to specifically point out:

Personally, I adore how many solid female characters Kika introduces. The majority of the reoccurring cast are women and they're all utterly brilliant. I am deeply in love with Bianca and I adore Rosa with my whole heart. There's a dangerous sapphic character who does not die and is in a relationship with another woman. There's a transwoman (who is I believe in a relationship) whose queerness is not obtusely focused on but rather treated as it should be: as a normal thing. You do not learn she's trans until one mention of past deadnaming (no name mentioned) appears. There's a hint that the main character might be bisexual. There's a nonbinary character relevant to the plot. There are multiple secondary characters using different pronouns. Queerness is treated by Kika as a usual everyday thing and it's very refreshing to see.

Kika sets the action in a city that resembles Athens: it has an Acropolis where elites live, the slums, the poorer areas and the more immigrant-populated areas. No real geographical location is ever marked but by some small cues you can figure out that the fictional city and its surrounding areas are heavily inspired by Greece with proximity to Egypt, Slavic territories, and Near East.

Main character's love interest (this book has a soulmate story as a background but it's not annoying/in your face) is coded to be what would equate to real world Egyptian, based on cultural codes. A lot of characters are heavily diverse, Kika uses a lot of names that sound Greek, Italian, Russian, and Arabic. It's a very modern Mediterranean-coded story.

I ADORE the attention Kika gives to her side characters. There's a character named Chimdi who is passionate about sculpture, and her mini-story is actually deeply impactful on how you perceive the Muses. The Muses are the only "other-born" who go by the names of the original Nine Muses and it's treated as a "marketing move" — there are so many analysis points the author makes and I just adore it.

Instead of having divine descendants follow individual Gods (who might or might not be mentioned), Kika makes the divine "other-born" descend from groups of divinities only: three Fates equate three sisters, countless oneiroi equate to multitudes of oneiroi-born, Muses equate to the rare event of nine girls being born in a family, and so on. It's fun how she puts it together.

This book very openly and directly hates cops and I love it for that. Kika overall comments a lot on social injustice, immigration laws, mistreatment of ostracized native population vs. ostracized immigrant population, xenophobia, and other matters of social segregation. Corrupt government and people just getting by are the background of her story.

There's one element at the very end that I'm a little worried about because I do not like this trope, but with Kika's gentle and careful approach to her own cultural narratives, I have faith it will be encountered properly in the sequel, Hearts That Cut.

There are a lot of topics she touches upon, and I do heavily recommend this book.

[citylighten]

"If there was anyone I thought could be like me it's you John. This life's in your blood." "What about Junior?" "He's a good kid, but he's not like you and me."

So for simblr gratitude day I had to be a little extra and create a video in honor of @digital-deluxe's story Public Enemies. I've consumed a lot of mafia fiction and I'm not lying when I say that this is one of the best narratives I've seen about a crime family. For a story about a man's rise in his crime family, pacing is highly important and that is something Kia excels in as the reader is allowed to follow John from the moment of his birth. The writing is realistic, the characters are intriguing yet flawed -- if you love mafia narratives Public Enemies is definitely a story that you should be reading and sharing with others.

[girl4music]

An ode to an incredible character in ‘Xena: Warrior Princess’. Callisto is the greatest “villain” I’ve ever seen on any TV show. I only put quotation marks around the word ‘villain’ because she really wasn’t a villain at all to me. I have a hard time calling her one because she was just depressed and psychotic. She was a misunderstood soul that needed to be saved.

I’m happy she got the ending she deserved in that Xena had to be the one to save her soul as she was who killed it in the first place. I never quite forgave her for that even though it was just backstory when I learned of it. This should have been the reason why she had to die and stay dead in ‘AFIN’ in my opinion instead of that unintentional fucking fire. It was a fire that burned Callisto’s hometown and killed her family too. But it wasn’t an “oopsies, I had no idea I did this because I was grieving and drunk”. It’s was more “I had no awareness or control over what my own army was doing and didn’t care enough to find out”, and therefore much more justified because it wasn’t an accident or a mistake. It was blatant ignorance and wilful negligence of her own actions and choices. If they really wanted Xena’s endgame to be over the implications of a fucking fire - this was how to do it!

I’m fairly certain if the show was flipped on its head and Callisto was the lead protagonist in the show instead, you’d absolutely see that Xena was the villain. So if you have any hard feelings towards Callisto in any way, shape or form, this video will change your mind because it shows Callisto’s side of the story - which is a side you don’t see often enough to realize how complicated of a character she actually is. She’s a woman who never got to be a child. Child of Cirra.

Follow her story of vengeance and hatred through this video and come to see Callisto in a whole new light.

Thank you, Hudson Leick, for giving us all such a phenomenal acting performance every time you were on screen that gave Callisto the necessary depth she needed so that she could be far more than just a villain in an overall story about evil villains turned antiheroes because Xena was never justified for her own villainy and your character took her to task for that and all of that only hit because YOU. WERE. SO. GOOD. It only worked as a narrative because you made it work. Any lesser performer would not have been able to do it.

Sure Callisto had to take the weight of her own crimes but she made sure Xena never was free of that weight at the same time and that’s why I fucking LOVE her!

“I love that girl who plays Callisto in the show. And then, the action in it is a lot of fun. The scripts are really good. There's some really cool storytelling going on. The whole lineage of the story -- the backstory of Xena's character -- is quite magnificent. And I would use the word "magnificent." There's a lot there to be had. The fact that she was an Atilla the Hun kind of killer and pillager. Years passed, Xena turns over this new leaf, but she is haunted, like Clint Eastwood in The Unforgiven -- she was haunted by her evil deeds. And I mean, they were evil, they were truly evil. She wasn't, like, kind of bad. She was an evil, murderous person. Untold numbers of dead during her reign, torture, whole races and tribes that don't exist anymore because of Xena. Now she's fighting for redemption, but she knows she doesn't deserve redemption and she will never get redemption. The only thing she can do is just do good now, on a day to day basis. But she doesn't deserve mercy. She's paying a debt she can never pay and she'll always be paying 10 cents on the dollar. That's rare for a male character. That's just good shit, that's just good indeed. And then Callisto comes back, who is a mirror image of Xena, doing the same murdering and killing with evil intentions -- but she exists only because Xena did it. It's her revenge for Xena, the fact that she created her in her hate. Callisto has every right to kill Xena, and Xena has every right in her own heart to die under Callisto's blade. But Callisto doesn't have the right to kill the innocent people she's killing. Therein lies -- I mean, that's a great conflict.” - Quentin Tarantino, Double Dare.

[peony-pearl]

"someone PLEASE dare me to talk about the writing of Ursa's story from the comics"

This is your sign, child. Tell me all you've got

BLESS YOU!!!!!!!!

A bit of a foreword to anyone reading: I am going to be speaking about the writing of Ursa's trials from the comics in a critical light in the ways that her story was chosen to be written this way. If you find any kind of comfort or catharsis in her story, this post may not be for you. I am not here to be an anti, I am here to look at changes made to a character that I think could have been a lot more interesting if she had been allowed to keep her original backstory.

That being said:

Ursa's story of being plucked out of a happy home to marry 'the bad guy' could be interesting!

My problem with it is the inconsistencies it creates in it's own narrative... and the fact that it's such painful woobification of a woman who was willing to commit a high crime to save her son in the way that her circumstances create an issue where she is nothing but a martyr. It also continues the whole 'good lineage vs bad lineage' idea that completely undermines the power of Zuko's arc.

Ursa, in the comics, is presented to us as this bright eyed hopeful actress, in love with a man named Ikem when Azulon rolls up with Ozai, unlike some earlier lore where she was born into royalty and was the perfect match for Ozai. Now she's subjected to a wretched life which I can only imagine they put her through to make her completely sympathetic, because otherwise she would have been just like the rest of the royal family - EVIL.

Which I really hate that train of thought, but this is a family friendly show and as good as atla does with it's good vs evil nuances, I often remember I have to cut it some slack... but then I get a bit more frustrated because of the whole 'just because it's family friendly means they can simplify things' which I also don't care for but again... eh. I can't be too picky at times. (I was also raised on Gargoyles which did a great job on showing villains in sympathetic moments and heroes having big major flaws so I'm already a little biased)

Regardless; completely rewriting Ursa's backstory to the point that we no longer see her view of the war (or Ikem's! So they're good people!! We promise!) just comes off as almost manipulative and middle-school fanfiction-y. Ursa is a good person to sympathize with because she's being forced into these situations :C

And as such, she's a good person because of Roku!! And so Zuko is a good person because his mom loved him so much!!

And such, they don't have to show any changes on Ursa's part. No moral failings, no her and Zuko butting heads once they reunite to show how much he's grown... his morals come from her and Roku, because Avatar lineage = good.

And that grinds my gears so hard because then just like Ursa, that's robbing Zuko of his autonomy to make bad choices.

When Iroh tells Zuko in The Avatar and the Fire Lord that his legacy is the good and evil within him, it sucks because Zuko's legacy should solely be his own choices (I have my own issues with Zuko's view of the crown). Not the bloodline within him that he can't control. THAT'S A MAJOR POINT OF THE SHOW. People aren't born evil.

and yet Ursa is GOOD because she is Roku's GRANDDAUGHTER. That's really it. Yes, I can understand that she was raised in the moral compass left behind by him. But Ozai is only really good/charming to Ursa right up until their wedding when suddenly he's just EVIL and he's like 'you're MINE now hehehehe' like there's no in between, you just have to show Ursa in this miserable predicament which then also doesn't allow for any interesting development in our Ozai, aka previous big bad which could have been him following his father's orders to marry some woman and maybe he legitimately TRIED to make things work because NO ONE IS BORN EVIL. Ozai is such a shadow of Zuko that he would try to appease his father, and he might take this marriage on in the hopes that it would start building a bridge between them.

And we're not even getting into the fact that we don't learn that Ursa is the Avatar's granddaughter until the final season, JUST IN TIME for Zuko to learn this while he's locked in his self loathing and is utterly directionless. Again, this takes away the importance of his own choices. The boy who started the series completely devoted to returning home, willing to put himself and others through constant danger and misery just to appease his father is given a free ride card of 'oh you're actually good on the inside! Just do the good thing!'

Because he's Ursa's son, the woman who didn't want to marry Ozai because he was so so awful that his bloodline is OBVIOUSLY why Azula is the way she is (ugh).

Like this could work in more fairytale/simpler story settings but atla has gone so far out of it's way to continue to say 'no one is born evil' and 'people can change'; but when it comes down to it, they're really restricting the moral compass.

In the end, Ursa is good and suffered. Ozai is BAD because VILLAIN. (which yes he is but... ugh).

I don't know if I've made sense. I had a more cohesive idea when I wrote those tags but this is more or less my views of Comic!Ursa.

I don't hate her. But I hate that they just kind of shoved her on the misery train and kind of went 'wow that sucks right? This makes you want to see Zuko find her right?'

And then he does and all is well. Because Ursa is a GOOD WOMAN unlike that EVIL OZAI.

[lesbian-trash-panda]

✨Q Rated: The Rise of Kyoshi

A✨Q - Amazing & Queer, Recommended

Welcome to Lesbian Trash Panda, where I recommend the finest treasures and the best trash a gay raccoon can find. Today’s entry is the first book in the duology about everyone’s favourite Earthbender Avatar - The Rise of Kyoshi!

Summary: If you watched Avatar: The Last Airbender, you’ll be familiar with Kyoshi, the intimidating 300-year-old badass who brought balance to the world two cycles before Avatar Aang.

Kyoshi has a fandom reputation as a merciless killer, but this book — you really see why!

Haha, just kidding, she’s a bisexual simp. The murder is only a side quest.

“The Rise of Kyoshi” follows the longest-lived Avatar from humble beginnings as an orphan to her youth as a servant girl to discovering her gifts, joining a bandit gang, fighting pirates, and taking on some of the most brutal villains in the Avatar universe. Also, she is a huuuuuuuge dork for Rangi, her Firebender bodyguard/friend-who-is-girl/maybe more??? This book is 60% revenge fantasy, 40% pining teenager in love. Kyoshi is part Batman part Sappho and we love her for it

Why you should read it: Did the Batman/Sappho comparison not do it for you? Ok, here’s some more convincing.

Avatar the Last Airbender is one of the best-loved animated shows of all time. It blends the best of eastern and western animation & storytelling conventions to create a universe that is rich in beauty, lore, character, and heart. “The Rise of Kyoshi” adds new historical context and intrigue to the Avatar world while remaining exciting and engaged in its own narrative.

Kyoshi is adorable, and that’s not something you would guess based on appearances in the show. She’s complex and has a lot on her plate and she is frequently put in no-win situations, in a way we’ve never quite seen before in this world. I appreciate when a story is willing to set up a dilemma and follow through on it, instead of pulling a last minute fake-out (cough cough Legend of Korea S1). There are still surprises, but she is forced to make tough decisions and those decisions have consequences.

Rangi is also a great addition to the Avatar universe. Fans of KorraxAsami who were disappointed by how the relationship was censored in the animated show will delighted by how open and honest Kyoshi is about her feelings for Rangi, and I love her for it. I am impressed by the complexity of queer relationships in the Avatar universe - the Legend of Korea tie-in comic Turf Wars gave a brief history lesson on how the four nations feel about it traditionally, and it’s clear the creators put thought and attention into the development of that element of this universe. I am glad they get to explore this part of their world more here, in an avenue where they didn’t have to bind themselves according to homophobic advertising standards.

The book is also funny. It has that classic Avatar humour with some added, “Oh, Kyoshi, you gay sad sack!” Lots of fun characters, exciting moments, and surprising depth.

I just finished reading it to my partner and she loved it. Hopefully you will too! Get it at your local library or buy it, I dunno.

Content Warnings: Surprisingly grim violence, including war crimes - more so than the animated series; for teen readers

Recommended for: Fans of Avatar the Last Airbender and Legend of Korra, fans of historical fantasy, people who wish Bruce Wayne was a gangly teenage girl and Alfred was a badass teenage girl

[fantabulisticity]

On March 21, 26 year-old Dexter Reed was surrounded by five plainclothes police officers in unmarked cars and shot and killed in a barrage of nearly 100 rounds of ammunition in 41 seconds — all because of an alleged seatbelt violation. The officers who murdered Dexter Reed were on a police tactical team, an “elite” squad of plainclothes officers who usually patrol Black and Brown communities and use pretextual stops as an excuse to look for a larger crime. Such units exist in police departments across the country. There have been national calls for them to be shut down. Whenever and wherever such tactical teams are used, especially for pretextual stops, situations end in violence. These teams target people in certain populations and they have a habit of brutality. The officers who murdered 12 year-old Thomas “TJ” Siderio in Philadelphia in March 2022 and 29 year-old Tyre Nichols in Memphis in January 2023 were a part of such tactical units.3 Black people in Chicago deserve better. Members of the community are demanding an end to pretextual traffic stops and for the dismantling of tactical teams that operate like death squads within the Chicago Police Department. Police Superintendent Larry Snelling vowed to prioritize accountability but, instead, he has been following the same war cry of law and order, making excuses for police violence and feeding into blaming the victim. The City of Chicago has the power to hold these officers accountable and reinforce that this kind of violence against Black people has consequences. Demand Chicago Police Superintendent Larry Snelling immediately fire the five officers involved in killing Dexter Reed. Below is the letter we will send to Chicago Police Superintendent Larry Snelling:

Here is the Petition: Dear Chicago Police Superintendent Larry Snelling, Not wearing a seatbelt is not a capital offense. Yet, on March 21, 26 year-old Dexter Reed was surrounded by five plainclothes Chicago police officers driving unmarked cars and shot and killed in a barrage of nearly 100 rounds of ammunition in 41 seconds — all because of an alleged seatbelt violation. You vowed to prioritize accountability but, instead, you have been amplifying harmful "law and order" narratives, making excuses for police violence, and feeding into victim blaming. This has created a culture that empowers officers to aggressively target and harm Black people like Dexter Reed while never announcing themselves as police officers. Dexter Reed never should have been stopped. There is no justification for the devastating police violence committed against him. We demand that you make good on your promise for accountability by immediately firing the five officers involved in killing Dexter Reed.

[rachelbethhines]

60 Years of Doctor Who Anniversary Marathon - McCoy 10th Review

Bernice Summerfield: Oh No It Isn't! - Spin-off

Part of what makes Bernice Summerfield such a long running success is that her series can function as a standalone thing rather than just a spin-off.

When Virgin Publishing lost the rights to Doctor Who back in 1996, they dug Benny (a character they had created for the New Adventures novels) out of the closet and designed a new series around her with no ties to Doctor Who what so ever.

That's not to say that they erased the character's past, she's still a companion and technically the series still takes place in the world of Who, but no mentions of the Doctor nor any other BBC owned character appear or are even named dropped.

So basically you can pick up this first novel, like I did, without ever having touched any of the NAs, or even without having seen an episode of Who in your life.

Because, besides Benny herself, the only other thing that can be associated with Who is Menlove Stokes from that Fourth Doctor book we covered, The Romance of Crime. And there's no references to that story here either.

But what about the actual book? Is it any good?

Ehhhh....

I want to like it. I really do.

I love the premise. Getting caught in a augmented reality based off fairy tales!? Yes please!

Also most the characters are likable enough, even with such a large cast.

But there's one thing that really drags the whole book down.

It's the subplot between Benny and one of her students.

Through out the story Benny keeps debating about whether or not she should pursue a romance with one of the college kids that she teaches... and it's just gross.

Granted, she never goes through with it, and the narrative repeatedly points out why it's toxic, but like... why the fuck would introduce your main hero with a such a subplot anyways?

I mean if you're going to tell such a story then actually tell it. Make it the focus and draw some real drama from it. Don't shove it into the background of a completely different narrative after introducing it.

The end result is just uncomfortable and distracting. The darker subject matter clashes horribly with the surreal comedy romp that the rest if the story wants to be, and so it never feels fully resolved.

In addition it winds up undoing any hard work the book made to present it's hero as relatable and likable.

I mean, my gosh, plenty of women get a divorce without turning into pedos... seriously what the fuck?

Yeah, yeah, yeah... I know the character is in college and would technically be considered 'legal', but he's still described as a teenager several times through out the book and she's in her mid to late 30s.

Also.. She's His Damn Teacher!

However, whenever this unpleasantness is shoved aside for the actual story, it's pretty dang good.

It's charming, funny, and fun!

Even if you're not familiar with British Panto you can still follow along with the tropes easily enough as they're mostly still rooted in fairy tales and musical theater.

It's certainly more digestible then most Virgin fare, I'll give it that, but it's still not enough to make me a Benny fan, sorry.