#not his interpretaton

[blood-orange-juice]

Now that everyone is also in awe of that twitter thread about Childe being Smart I want to rebutt half of it.

Personally, I think he's perfectly average/a bit smarter than average, or rather good at some things and bad at others.

He's a quick thinker, proven by his character stories (people are indeed not assigned into vanguard just for dumb strength) and by how he used Traveler to check whether the forged sigil worked and sow some discord in the process (obviously his own plan and a good one at that. and he came up with it in a matter of minutes). Being able to lie through omission is no easy feat either.

He's quite poetic and it's usually a sign of intelligent person. (modern AU untraumatized Childe would 100% be a literature major, don't @ me. he'd also like Manowar)

However, he is also young, had no proper mentor and no formal education. Also brash and too self-confident at times. You *need* to be comfortable with doubting youself to be smart, it's thinking 101.

*

For starters, not suspecting Zhongli to be Rex Lapis was... an accomplishment in and by itself. The city breathes of this story. There are at least three books on the topic, it's told in every tea house, the traveler learns it through a single conversation with a trader in port. A golden-eyed person with excellent taste is always Rex Lapis or at least should be suspected to be him.

Childe somehow missed it, while being able to analyze intricacies of Qixing politics. This is bizarre and means that either he's extremely narrowinded (he doesn't show signs of that, quite the opposite), or that he was simply repeating someone else's ideas. His subordinates obviously bring him news and reports. So… how do we know his ability for political analysis is his and not someone else's?

He does look like the type who would repeat another person's good idea as his own (I'm imagining that's exactly how Zhongli tricked him into that whole sigil of permission thing).

Having said that, being able to listen to information brought by your subordinates is a rare and precious trait, I wish some of my bosses were more like that, haha.

(alternative option: that is in fact his own skill and one of the few skills where he did get actual mentorship. Pulcinella drilled attention to politics into his brain because otherwise things always got too messy when Childe got involved

it would also mean that nothing can drill attention to cultural stuff into Childe's brain because fuck it we ball)

*

Being able to copy sigils well enough? First, it's the job for the r&d team (can we have some appreciation for the Fatui r&d team, please)? Second, I'm not sure anyone truly copied those. Maybe Zhongli just enchanted every single one.

I they were actually succesfully copied, we have a problem of fatui being able to mass-print them and I don't want to think of the consequences. I hope Zhongli didn't let that happen.

*

Manipulating Traveler to do what he wanted in the Liyue arc? It's not like the Traveler had a lot of options or any personal loyalty to the Qixing. Did anyone really trust him to be our friend? What other choice did we have though but to follow his lead.

That's 10/10 for opportunistic thinking but it's not really a showcase of his manipulation skills (I'll keep thinking his social skills are abysmal until proven otherwise).

*

Being able to tell you just came from the blacksmith? Please, it's not him being observant, he just had you followed.

*

So, yeah... he's smart but he's also, what, 19? 20? (I hc him on the younger side because it helps me overlook his bad traits). It's amazing he got this far and he'll become smart one day but that day hasn't happened yet.

In other words he is far from dumb but the fatui do treat him as dumb muscle because what do you expect.

[princeescaluswords]

A lot of Scott haters generate very poor analysis of the show because they are operating on a fundamentally flawed premise, namely, that the characters they like have the same opinion of Scott that they do. (This isn't exclusive to Teen Wolf fandom, I've seen it in other fandoms, it's a common error fandoms make.) I may have problems with certain actions taken by Stiles but I would NEVER claim he doesn't love or care about Scott or would choose Derek of all people over him. That's not Stiles.

Nothing supports your conclusion more than fandom's "re-interpretaton" of Master Plan (2x12). In this episode, Stiles makes several very clear (and very emotional) statements about how he feels about the most important people in his life: his father, his mother, Lydia, and Scott. His actions conform completely to those statements.

He makes it clear he loves his father, Lydia, and Scott. He acts to protect his father, Lydia, and Scott. He lies, concealing the truth behind his kidnapping, to his father, because he doesn't want his father anywhere near the Hale-Argent feud. He shouts at Lydia to try to dissuade her from pursuing Jackson, revealing the depth of his feelings toward Lydia, the danger she is in, and how that is influenced by his own mother's death, but he still guides her to the climactic confrontation in the warehouse. He doesn't seek out Scott immediately because he knows that his kidnapping and beating is meant to apply pressure to Scott "And look at my face, huh? Come on, you actually think this was meant to hurt me?" In the aftermath, he reassures Scott that he has his back always.

Stiles always figures it out, and he recognizes the dangers that the people he loves are in, and he acts accordingly.

But then here comes fandom. Since the majority of fandom seems not to be all that attracted to Lydia, they don't care about her. Since the majority are busily projecting their own issues with their parents onto the Sheriff, they don't recognize how his position in law enforcement complicates his relationship with Stiles. Since the majority of the fandom are outraged that Derek isn't the main character, they are primed to see Scott in the worst possible light.

The fandom wants a Stiles who dwells exclusively on his own physical and emotional pain and who doesn't look at what has happened -- as the Canon Stiles does -- in terms of the health and safety of his family and friends. The fandom also wants a Stiles who worships Derek the way they do, so they conjure concern for the Hale pack, even though Stiles didn't mention Derek (and Derek didn't mention Stiles) during the final two episodes of Season 2. They want Stiles, as their stand-in, to make the case for shifting the focus of the show to Derek, so they perform incredible feats of doublethink, taking Stiles's earlier shots at Scott (which they have interpreted before as Stiles's way of showing his love for Scott) as literal, critical and damning judgment of Scott's value while simultaneously believing that Stiles would be shocked and blindsided by Scott's behavior.

Of course, to accomplish this new paradigm they have to eject 70% of canon. Derek didn't try to kill Lydia, Derek hasn't been alternatively brutal and manipulative toward his best friend, Isaac and Erica didn't attack Stiles on Derek's orders, and Derek didn't create the kanima which almost murdered Stiles's father. Fanon Stiles doesn't love Lydia enough to challenge Peter and Gerard, he doesn't care for and have faith in Scott enough to ignore his own physical and emotional trauma to support him , and he certainly didn't leave Boyd and Erica in the Argent basement in order to prioritize protecting his father. I imagine this level of editing is hard work.

Of course, when people like us point this out, they have two primary and contradictory declamations. "We're not bound by canon!" fandom cries only to follow that up immediately with "Why can't you let people enjoy things?" But by discarding canon to this degree, they're not just enjoying things: they're creating things. And when anyone creates something and puts it out for public consumption, the audience for it -- which includes you and me -- gets to react to that creation, just as we react to Teen Wolf.

And the red flags in their creation are consistent and widespread. Fanon Stiles is not Allison's friend and not in love with Lydia but still pays attention to their actions, he resents the fact that Scott simultaneously relies on him but doesn't do anything to discourage it, and desperately wants to be part of Derek "Like a hyperactive spaz" Hale's pack. Fanon Stiles cannot stand Scott because he hid his plan against Gerard from Stiles (even though there's no evidence Scott actually did that) but is more than willing to defend Derek's repeated instances of concealing information (the existence of the alpha, biting Jackson, the approach of the alpha pack, and Peter's resurrection). Fanon Stiles cannot forgive Scott for the Neck Grab of Destiny because it is morally wrong and crossed boundaries (regardless of the threat to Allison), but literally has not the slightest concern that Derek dispatched teenagers to execute an innocent Lydia repeatedly.

When we interrogate them about the choices they made for their creation, they get defensive. If they're willing to rewrite that much of canon, why does their product consistently celebrate the white male characters and diminish or demonize female and/or minority characters? After all, as they'll state forever, they're not beholden to canon. Yet, there has been no other offered consistent explanation for the specificity of Fanon Stiles's behavior from the fandom, because they obviously can't come out and say that they wanted to discard Canon Stiles's fantastic personality and actions for one that takes revenge for a Latino being the main protagonist and not a white man.

BUT IT'S NOT RACISM.

[thesherrinfordfacility]

i saw your tags about the oxrib discourse, and thank you so much for putting into words what's been bothering me about this entire thing. i'm sooo tired of how much emphasis is put on authorial intent rather than peoples own interpretaton of the text, and how people feel the need to have neil vaildate their reading of a scene and then accuse him of gaslightning/queerbaiting when the doesn't. like, just interpret the scene however you want and stop looking for validation from the author in order for it to be meaningful to you!

hi anon!!!✨ ahhhh you're very welcome!!!💕

[submarinerwrites]

can u talk a bit more about what you think jameson doesn't get? (I have the same impression but I've never been able to rly articulate why(

yes! absolutely! apologies for the late reply and also the essay! also, I should clarify—I don't strictly dislike Jameson: he says a lot of things that I agree with, and my opinion on The Political Unconscious has a lot more to do with my opinion on Marx than it does Jameson. for instance, I find his claim that Marxist criticism is “the absolute horizon of all reading and all interpretaton” extremely compelling. [1] like Jameson, in my own research, I find myself absolutely entranced by the infinite varieties and potentialities of Marxist theory. on a more functional level, I do use structural Marxism on like, a daily basis, so there's also that.

likewise, when it comes to Jameson's theory of literature, I also am actually obsessed with this one quote that I'd like to share:

Religion is thus here the distorted or symbolic coming to consciousness of itself, of the human community... The religious figures then become the symbolic space in which the collectivity thinks itself and celebrates its own unity; so that it does not seem a very difficult next step, if, with Frye we see literature as a weaker form of myth or a later stage of ritual to conclude that in that sense, all literature, no matter how weakly, must be informed by what we have called a political unconscious, that all literature must be read as a symbolic meditation on the destiny of community. [2]

basically, according to Jameson, religion is indeed what Bataille would describe as “the search for a lost intimacy,” which is in turn unconsciously replicated, embodied, and transformed through the literary work. [3] so to Jameson, every text is implicitly political, which is something that I agree with on a very fundamental level, and is also phrased in a very beautiful way in this passage.

that being said: Jameson rejects, in a way that is really uncomfortable for me, Marx’s dialectic, and therefore Marx’s materialism. Jameson writes (and I don’t like this):

Marxism is, however, not a mechanical but a historical materialism: it does not assert the primacy of matter so much as it insists on an ultimate determination by the mode of production. [4]

ohhh, man. look I know a lot less than you in a lot of respects but, Jameson, I am pretty sure you are wrong. throughout his entire oeuvre, Marx is deeply concerned with the sensuous world, the real and inescapable importance of matter. in his dissertation, for instance, he describes matter as a continual folding and refolding, a dialectical process which actually allows for self-awareness and the existence of the world itself. matter in motion is Marx, is the dialectic that’s so central to the entirety of his work. for instance, in the preface to Capital, he writes that the dialectic is

a scandal and an abomination to the bourgeoisie and its doctrinaire spokesmen, because it includes in its positive understanding of what exists a simultaneous recognition of its negation, its inevitable destruction; because it regards every historically developed form as being in a fluid state, in motion, and therefore grasps its transient aspect as well; and because it does not let itself be impressed by anything, being in its very essence critical and revolutionary. [5]

here’s a little diagram of the dialectic that expresses the process as a negation and elevation, production and consumption, existence and essence: [6]

it’s an evolving, iterative process, which I think has truly transformative, radical implications for the reading of the literary text, but sadly one that Jameson appears to be largely uninterested in. instead, he is more concerned with the use of the Greimas rectangle as a hermeneutic tool. here’s an example using the sacred and profane, which I’ve filled out with various adjectives. [7]

so, on a very material level, the Greimas rectangle is predicated on binary opposites and physically closed off, which should stand in sharp contrast to the image of the dialectic I’ve provided. from just a pedagogical perspective, I’ve met a lot of people who take issue with the Greimas square. like, I am not the only one who doesn’t want students to base their hermeneutical approach to literature on binary opposites and logical operators. #sorrynotsorry

Jameson does acknowledge that most Marxists view the rectangle as fundamentally anti-dialectical, but he simultaneously claims that it can be “reappropriated for a historicizing and dialectical criticism by designating it as the very locus and model of ideological closure.” [8] I take issue with the word “closure” here. the dialectic, as Marx himself understands it, actively resists closure, conclusion, neat resolution, because it is cyclical and iterative, in a state of constant motion and metabolism. as I mentioned earlier, Marx actively describes the dialectic as transient and fluid. 

frankly, I feel that Jameson just doesn’t understand the potency or function of Marx’s dialectic. the kind of logical (or ideological) closure that Jameson seeks throughout The Political Unconscious is just fundamentally incompatible with Marx himself, which is deeply problematic, because this book has been used as a pedagogical tool basically since it was published. in essence, I’m truly not sure that The Political Unconscious produces truly critical, original thought, which I feel strongly should be the goal of literary theory as a discipline. if we want our students to think dialectically—and I very much think we do!—we need to actually teach the dialectic. so, tldr, I think The Political Unconscious just doesn’t fully grasp the potency of Marx’s dialectical materialism, and that makes me very sad.

Jameson, The Political Unconscious, 17.

Ibid., 70.

Bataille, "General Economy," 57. likewise, Bataille argues that man is a fundamentally religious animal, which... if you're not ripping your hair out over him giving that as a definition and then saying that... idk what to say.

Jameson, The Political Unconscious, 45.

Marx, Preface to the Second Edition of Capital, 103. 

c.f. Nail, Marx in Motion, 34.

c.f. Hébert, “The Semiotic Square,” 2. if anyone has any ideas for my Greimas square... please hit me up, I desperately wanna hear them.

Jameson, The Political Unconscious, 47.

[handgiven]

███████, the messenger, the follower, the voice.

███████ was created as a lesser messenger. Their job was to carry words that were not their own, or very interesting for that matter. In fact, for a long time they were all they could speak, as not to give space to any sort of interpretaton. They were a part of the same garrison as Anane who’d treated them kindly in spite of their rough exterior. That was why when Anane decided to change sides, ███████ followed. They would rather repeat the words of one who respected them than be overtaken by God or his mighty archangels ever again.

At first, the rebellion had its perks. Such as talking to Lucifer, Kesabel, and others that had a stirring of creativity and free will in their core. For the first time ███████ was forming their own words and opinions, much shaped however by their gratitude and newfound loyalty to this side of the War. It did not all go according to their hopes, however. The War was bloody, both sides losing important beloved angels left and right and as it went on, ███████ grew to understand the danger of losing even Anane as they threw themself into the frontline any given chance.

That was why, upon observing Michael with his sword, mere seconds after having felt a strange pain in their heart, closing in on Anane that had rested, defeated upon the ground, they were fast to interfere. Throwing themself right between the two, they managed to shield Anane but got their wing sliced off in the process. In a way, it aided their escape, because upon losing a wing, the angel lost balance and fell from grace at last, pulling Anane with him. Had he not lost his wing, he doesn’t know if they could have escaped quite fast enough from Michael’s wrath.

It was not just the wing he lost. Having lost it to Michael’s sword he’d lost semblance of who he once was, his name, all that connected him to Heaven once. He took on the name Antonius, Anton, Antoine, in many varieties throughout the centuries. He became an upstanding resident of the Earth, with only Anane’s presence reminding him of what he once was. He tries to stay out of supernatural problems, he tries to work a dayjob and move around frequently enough to go unnoticed by the humans as one who barely ages. He writes poetry, now, which might just be his favourite part of this whole ordeal. Not only are his words his now, he rules them with a gentle touch, and may gift them to others if he chooses, no sooner.

the caretaker, the poet, the healing

[natalyarose]

Hi,first of all you're very beautiful,had to mention it,I saw you have opened free reading for now so I was wondering if I could request one. My question is what kind of person is my romantic soulmate-romantic life partner?

aww thankyou!! 🩷

Sure thing- I drew The Emperor, The Lovers, and the King of Pentacles

I can see two possible interpretations for this.

This could be eluding to a potential romantic partner who is very traditionally masculine or assertive as well as very adept & 'at the top' in their career (The Emperor). With the Lovers, it could be somebody who while they know how to command a room and lead the way with tenacity, they truly value loving connection and intimacy in their life. They could be very gentle and sweet natured outside of their workplace. The King of Pentacles further signifies somebody who likely has a very traditionally masculine manner of being & is extremely financially literate, stable and resourceful. Very generous, wise and calm. I'm definitely feeling that this is somebody who makes a lot of money/has a strong career, but also has that strong drive for human connection and to have vulnerability and sensuality in a relationship.

The second possible interpretation would be that spirit is saying that whoever ends up being your life partner will depend on your own decisions & life path (the Emperor) influenced by what your own values in love are + the connections you create with others (the Lovers). The King of Pentacles could be saying that it depends on the physical environment you find yourself in and who you meet as a result of that.

I often believe that readings can have multiple viable interpretatons that are equally true and offer valuable insight, especially when it comes to future related questions 💟

[kanohivolitakk]

Also regarding Mata Nui and Makuta as paralells, I find this quote by Gordon Klimes of Templar Games regarding Makuta’s characterization in MNOG rather interesting

“Good and evil just wasn’t good enough any more. It didn’t make any sense any more. But this was okay, because from the beginning, that’s not what it was about. The Makuta wasn’t evil, and his brother, Mata Nui, wasn’t good.

We knew that while building was fun, it was just as much fun to destroy. They were two sides of the same coin, and neither were wrong: it was all part of the play, part of learning, part of having fun. Not good or evil: Creation and Destruction, equal powers in the universe, natural and necessary. Both good. Both bad. Both neither. It’s true, we’d painted Destruction a bit negatively - using words like “Infected” Mask, or “Monsters,” but we’d needed the conflict.

So the Makuta, for all its darkness and danger, was not evil after all, and he says as much at the end. The final act was the confrontation, not between Good and Evil, which was meaningless, but between Creation and Destruction, where everything comes from nothing, and goes back to it, eventually. This was the struggle between the Toa and the Rahi, and Mata Nui and Makuta, and a LEGO fan and her kid brother, building and smashing happily, in equal measure. Our world had gone a bit mad, but to us, this helped make some sense of it. We wanted to share what small comfort it brought.” ~ Gordon Klimes

I find this quote fascinating. Not only does it pretty much confirm that MN and Makuta were always meant to be foils of each other (I mean that’s obvious as the “good and evil brother dynamic”), it also states that neither were meant to be as good or evil, instead being avatars of creation and destruction respectively. Templar didn’t want to put any moral judgement to the concepts, just have them present the concepts themselves.

With Makuta, yeah the fandom pretty much has accepted that he went through multiple iterations, and his original incarnations were far different compared to the “chess master with a god complex” he eventually became (how different Bob Thompsons Makuta and post time Trapped Makuta are is a whole nother story, though I’d personally argue they aren’t that different.)

But what I find interesting is that from the very beginning there was some debate regarding Makuta’s characterization. While yeah, Templar did use Alstairs storybible as basis, they basically invented MNOG Makuta themselves. As such, there’s actually a decent amount of differences between Templars interpretation and Alistair’s interpretaton. According to the Shadow Emperor/Makus Original Bionicle ideas, Alistair had intended Makuta to be a devil archetype, an omnipresent evil. The fact that Alistair had inteded Makuta to be evil is pretty much different from Templar’s incarnation being less evil, and moreso a force of nature, though Alistair’s incarnation walked a fine line between a character and an entity as well.

But while I have more to say about Makuta,I find it rather interesting that despite being the “benevolent god that needs saving”, Klimes said that MN wasn’t good. Again, like Templars take on Makuta, it feels that their take on MN paints him more as an entity or a concept than an actual character.

[alterrune]

BACKGROUND PROGRAMS #3: THE EAVESDROP

CENTER FOR CHAOS & CONTAINMENT DESERT OUTPOST, 10:30 PM (SIX MONTHS BEFORE THE EVENTS OF ATO)

NOTE: This event occurs directly after Event #2 had ended.

(A woman concealing herself in a dark purple hood is seen sneaking through the hallways of the CCC outpost. She finds a man with a nametag marked "Citrus", along with his assistant, with his nametag marked "Pinker". She quickly hides behind the wall and eavesdrops on a conversation the two are having.)

Can you believe that guy? Protesting against us? "Oh, those people have lives too! You can't just freeze them and blah, blah, blah!" Ah, to hell with all that bullshit. I'm just glad we sent that agent over to plant him with a "high chaos reading" so we could freeze him for life, and the government is none the wiser!

Clarker, sir, with all due respect, don't you think what we're doing is wrong?

The government is paying us TRILLIONS to do this, Parkson. And that's a whole lotta moola.

It's a shame you can't use that as a bail bond, then!

(As the hooded figure says that, she shoots a bolt of lightning out from a heavy-duty sword and hits Clarker [Citrus] down to the ground. Parkson [Pinker] tries to run, but the lady shoots him down as well, and he lands right next to Clarker. The lady then walks up to them, and pulls her hood down to reveal her face to the two corrupt men. Clarker knows that bright purple hair anywhere: The lady in the cloak is none other than Violet Wolfsbane.)

I snuck in here because I had a suspicion that there was more going on here than it seemed. And from what I overheard from your little conversation, Citrus, I was right.

(Violet picks up Clarker and holds him by his shirt collar.)

Why are you cryogenically freezing people just because they don't agree with your ideals, Citrus?

(Clarker simply gives a sly chuckle.)

You think we actually care about "containing chaos"? Go back into the kitchen you clearly belong in and grow a spine in there, Wolfsbane.

We don't care if we're capturing innocent people, or staging chaos readings so we can capture someone who we don't like. All we care about is that we're getting government funding for this, and getting money for this is all we care about here.

So why don't you let go of me, go into the kitchen, and make me a sandwitch, bitch.

(Violet, absolutely DISGUSTED at what just came out of Clarker's absolutely sexist mouth, chucks him out of his office window, shattering the glass and sending him careening from the top floor to the ground below. With a loud SMASH, he lands face-first onto the pavement, but somehow, still alive! She then jumps out, lands skillfully, and moves in to get some final words in.)

Citrus, you're very lucky I don't want to kill you. Severely maiming you and embedding glass shards into every part of your body for what you said was more than enough. You are a sexist PIG, you sick fuck, and I hope you burn in hell for what you've done. I've teleported the people in the stasis chambers to my location, the Chaos Creation Center. You may wanna rename your company to something with a different acronym. Something like, oh, I dunno, the "Institute for Idiots and Imprisonment".

(As Violet walks away, dropping her CCC badge down onto Clarker's paralyzed body along with a letter of resignation, she realizes how good of a nickname her interpretaton sounds.)

Hmmm..."Institute for Idiots and Imprisonment"...I think I could use that!

NO NEW BIOS OR ACHIEVEMENTS AVAILABLE FROM THIS EVENT

[tilia-cacophonous]

I’m bored and I’ve been thinking about homestuck classpects a lot recently, so here are my very vague ideas for how Death Note characters could be classpected, because my brain took my interests and decided to make a soup haha

Heavily based on optimisticDuelist’s class interpretatons

Light Yagami: Witch (Wizard?) of Hope. As for the choice between passive and active, to me his actions throughout the story seem more selfishly motivated. Even in the Yotsuba arc, his need to catch Kira seems more like a quest for vengeance; I will catch him to clear my name. Yes, he genuinely disgusted by Kira’s actions, but as a Hopebound it wouldn’t suprise me if his morals,  goals, and worldview would be naturally  linked to actions. At the same time, Light’s way of acting at the beginning of the story seem more fitting for the passive counterpart of the Witch- the Heir. That could be just roleplaying  the class for the sake of pleasing  Soichiro, becoming an active class player the moment the situation he’s in leaves the comfort zone of daily life. Another option is Light starting as an Heir, out of fear of consequences (death) starting to roleplay a Witch to stay interesting in Ryuk’s eyes, and as Light uses the Death Note at some point he actually Inverts from an Heir (passive) to a Witch (active).  Or Light could have just really been one the entire time. Heirs’ storyline focuses on taking the intrinsic, surrounding  them aspect and trying to find balance; working for the benefit of others. On the other side there’s the witch, who is very powerful but is bound to the whims of a Familiar figure (who I think would correspond to Ryuk).

L: Mage of Mind. First thinking about the passive-active alignment, but ultimately I decided that yes, he solves the hardest cases.... but he was doing that primarily for his own entertainment. That placed him in an active class. At some point I was contemplating a Thief, but I think  that Mage fits better.

[yourbuerokrat2]

Dark!Q song Starkiller by Bear Ghost (https://youtu.be/s9LxdEFGnr4)

Seems like a darker version of Q together with a Continuum that no longer cares about what he does, especially if you take 'Starkiller literally.

What I think shows this song is a version of Q that goes around and dragging other people to his level by bringing out the worst in them and controlling them for awhile till either he gets bored of them or they leave and Q feeling like he never meant anything, because in the end everyone and especially the people he manipulates are nothing but toys to him.

Now, this Q getting an interest in Picard would be interesting.

Because Picard does have a bit of a mean streak, can act immoral and if Q could feel a certain attraction for him and the things he offers coming from Picard he would decide to play his game aagain.

This too could end in a 'an unstoppable force meets an immovable object', because I can't really see that as soon as Picard would see what an even more immoral and sadistic version of Q tries to do that he would let himself be corrupted.

Í mean Q is not dealing with a Dr. Faustus that already secretly craves power and already is a bit rotten on the inside with only needing someone to bring it to light.

Q is also not dealing with someone relatively young or in an identity crises who he could manipulate into seeing him as a guiding hand to take their life into their own hand and do what they want.

Sure, you could take Picards crises after Locutus, but even though Picard was vulnerable, the thought of taking revenge on the Borg would be sweet but I think that his morals and his fears of becoming anything even close to Q would be too big.

Besides, Picard has a good support system and I think that Q clearly wanting to show and bring Picard to the Dark Side would be something the crew would reassure Picard they would never let happen and that he is too much of a good person.

I just think, that perhaps it would be uninteionally funny to have a dark!Q repeatadly try again and again to get Picard to join his dirty and mean games, only to get rejected again and again.

Let's say this version of Q makes up games and tests, where Picard would be forced to do something immoral to save a bunch of people.

Like dude, Picard is already forced to make decisions like that on a regular basis. He wouldn't feel good about it, but together with Troi he would be able to overcome it.

It would be even worse for Q since he would be able to feel that deep down Picard is attracted to him and that despite everything Picard tells him Picard is tempted from time to time

But even if Q would bring up Picard feeling tempted and having him admit it in front of his crew, Picard would tell him that he knows and that it is only human to have feelings of want for power and revenge and atttraction towards something forbidden.

What matter though are not the thougts and feelings, but wether or not one chooses to act on them. And Picard can reassure Q however many times he needs to hear it, that Picard never intends to act on his.

In the end Q could just snap his fingers and make Picard bad, but what Q here is after is the victory of finally getting Picard to see things his way.

Also dark!Q ending up being the one having a crisis, when he actually starts to care about Picard and ends up falling in love/obsession (depending on wether you want this to have a good or a bad ending).

Side Note: If you take away the more evil aspects, what I do find interesting is the obvious need of the singer to control the other. Which I do think is kind of canon between them and I do think that in a more unhealthy interpretaton of their relationship there would be a constant conflict of control and domination (not in a sexual sense just general).

[grelleswife]

Where would Sebastian take Meyrin for on a date you think? Im asking because I like your interpretaton of him and how Baptdemonprincess does Meyrin so thank you ^^

Hi, anon! I think Sebastian would take a similar approach to Miss Sutcliff in the Grellerin Valentine’s rp that bapy and I wrote together. Although the Phantomhive servants‘ basic needs are met, Mey Rin doesn’t normally partake of the finer things in life—she’s a maid, after all. Sebastian would want to take her someplace where she was treated like a lady and truly felt special. Probably an elegant café or restaurant, or maybe a carriage ride through a beautiful city park, or even a shopping trip in London where he bought her a few pretty dresses, shoes, hats, etc. Anything that made Mey Rin feel like the princess she is! 🥰

[antiqua-lugar]

How Black Books Supports Bisexual Bernard

What I personally find really interesting about this joke is that Bernard says he is not gay not because he is not into men, but because he is trash and not into dancing which could mean that:

a) he is misinformed by society on what being gay means b) he gave up on identifying as queer because he gave up on pursuing queer men because he does not fit in with the local gay community - the thinks that if he cannot partecipate in the “gay lifestyle”, then he cannot identify as queer.  i mean, he must have read about identity and performance at some point in his life and he has higher chances to stumble into a relationship with a woman than a man after all  (his comment about standards of hygene could also be interpreted as being about the beauty standards gay men suffer through but i might be reaching here) d) all of the above This interpretation adds a lot to the whole show, which is entirely centered on the friendship between Bernard, Manny and Fran and in the way they can be completely themselves with each other but also, thanks to Manny, on how Bernard and Fran are becoming slightly better versions of themselves. The show in particular focuses on the relationship between Bernard and Manny, which is not framed like a conventional bromance or friendship but instead mirrors  a “traditional” religious marriage. So it is possible to take Bernard coming to terms with his sexuality and identity as one of the ways he gets better and the show 100% supports this interpretaton.

Marriage Tropes

Bernard is the provider in the traditional sense (it is his bookshop they are living out of, literally) while Manny’s role is pretty much “supporting” Bernard or “contributing”*. Manny makes Bernard’s business better thanks to his accounting and salesman skills, cooks, cleans and fullfills Bernard’s emotional needs. The show also depicts their relationship by resorting to common marital tropes in old comedies, such as Manny (the wife) feeling unappreciated, Manny wanting to “get out of the house”, Manny managing the household and trying to get Bernard to get his shit together, and generally the husband being a dick to his wife but it always work out in the end because they love each other so much.    

If we consider that Bernard was probably raised in a Catholic religous environment (like Dylan Moran was) and had already actively questioned his sexuality, it is high probable that he pretty soon becomes aware of having accidently stumbled into the queer version of a traditional marriage which he had never thought would happen to him because he does not “fit in” as a queer man and he has no clue what to do. Bernard and The Power Of Love

From Bernard’s two romantic relationships with women we notice that he usually goes into Sickening Sweethearts mode(2) to the point that the only woman he ever loved faked her death just to have a clean break-up (according to Fran Bernard was always an asshole, so I don’t think Bernard being an asshole was the deal breaker here). He does not go into Sickening Sweethearts mode with Manny, but everytime Manny leaves, Bernard pretty much rolls over and waits for death. And when Manny is there, Bernard feels entitled to the entirety of his time, effort, attention, obedience and care. He claims proudly that he is “mine” and his own “human plaything”. Since the intensity of his feelings seems to be the same, Bernard probably does not go into Sickening Sweethearts mode because he has no idea of how to act in a queer relationship and moreover he thinks that Manny is straight, since he does not know about what happened with the photographer. 

[image credits: this post from aleks91slnk ]

We can see that Bernard goes through character development during the series from the way he slightly gets better as the series goes on - Bernard does more nice things for Fran and Manny, pretends to be Manny’s business partner to make his parents happy, goes to parties, goes on holidays, all culminating in Bernard helping Manny get a girl to make him happy. The series also clearly presents this character development as a consequence of his relationship with Manny, as both Bernard and Fran acknowledge that he has changed their lives for the better. There is something else to consider however when considering his relationship with Manny and the idea of Bernard having feelings for him when it comes to Bernard’s sexuality. While he and Manny mirror a husband-wife relationship, there are still important differences from traditional depictions of this trope in comedy - Manny cleans but the place isn’t spotless - they have to hire a cleaner for that. Manny cooks but nothing special. He washes their clothes but it takes Manny’s mother to restore Bernard’s clothes to their original color. Drinking and smoking abound. If Manny wants to talk about gossip, he calls Fran and leaves Bernard alone with his books. They have a ridicolous contraption to make toast in the morning. It is a husband-wife relationship and a queer relationship which does not require either of them to mold themselves into anything they are not. It is exactly what Bernard, who thinks that you cannot being gay without high hygene standards and too much dancing, needs. Manny is influencing him in subtle ways, they compromise and they fight about Bernard’s being a jerk, but Bernard is still allowed to be Bernard Black, human disaster. Two notes on framing

It is interesting to notice that they discuss their sexuality during the second episode of the first season and Bernard’s (presumed) dead girlfriend during the last episode of the last season, while discussing Manny’s interest for the girl he eventually hooks up with thanks to Bernard. Both the fact that the discussion happened at all and the fact that it happened so early in the series provides immediately a possible frame of interpretation for the whole show (or at least for series 1, which ends hinting that Manny might not be as straight as he thinks he is while Bernard has never completely ruled it out). In particular, Bernard’s girlfriend faking her own death to get away from him is put in direct contrast with Bernard’s decision to help Manny get a girl. Bernard realizes that his previous understanding of relationships was flawed and costed him the only woman he loved, and changes his approach towards Manny as to not lose him as well. At the same time, the first time we see Bernard as openly feeling lonely and alone is when he has made peace with it for the sake of Manny and Fran. Fran’s role on the episode is also particularly interesting - during the whole show she is costantly encouraging Bernard to openly admit his feelings for Manny instead of pretending he does not care, and in this episode she is now the one providing Manny with key information about Bernard’s love life. Bernard’s character development is contingent on Bernard coming at peace with his own emotions and feelings - and why not, his sexuality. 

Another interesting thing to notice is that every time Manny leaves (or is planning to) or is taken away, it is usually done in relation to a male figure clearly presented as in direct competiton with Bernard - the photographer, who not only treasures Manny but also compliments his beard (which Bernard hates), Simon Pegg as a librarian with his new clean shiny shop and a positive attitude and even the famous world-travelling charming explorer (who Bernard also gets a crush on). Even the girl he hooks up with at the end shows up thanks to the “leaving something behind” trick that Bernad expressely and explicitely mocked. 

At the same time, all the male figures who are not like Bernard are also not like Bernard in the sense that they do not care for Manny as a person. Bernard is an asshole but an asshole who cares and will actually fight Simon Pegg for wanting to cut Manny’s hair. Which by the way is another incredible common husband-wife trope in comedies.

tl;dr Black Books is a show about the friendship between three weirdos who love each other because they can be their true selves together but also change together, and if we want to interpret Bernard as a queer man struggling with his identity and getting better because his relationship with Manny, romantic or not, helps him, there is enough in the show to make it a perfectly valid and consistent interpretation

*(note: not being religous myself I had to google exactly what the wife is supposed to do in a marriage according to the Catholic doctrine and apparently there is not agreed upon term, unlike “the husband is the provider”. It really says a lot about what they thought of the role of women that there is not even a fucking word for it.)

[blossompuppy]

Hi, I just want to let you know that some people consider it inappropriate to romantically pair Miku an Luka together, since official sources give their ages as 16 and 20. If you interpret them differently that's fine but ppl usually see by them as that and it's best to let others know when you use a different interpretaton

yeah i actually didn’t look up their ages until later after i drew this unfortunately agh!! thank you so much for the warning, i totally didn’t kno when i was drawing this. i probably shouldn’t have posted it after i found out haha

sorry about that, and thanks again!! i won’t be drawing them as a couple anymore knowing that

[mi5014harrystubbs]

Distorted Version and Raddical Interpretation

Distorted Interpretation

I feel like upon further thinking my “accurate” interpretaton of the story may not be all that accurate as I am taking a lot of liberities with the interpretation and adding a lot that was not specified in the actual story. There for I belive it is a Distorted verisoon of the pipes stroy.

Radical Interpretation

The Boy was violent at school and was sent to a home for bad children. When he was there he started having issues but when he was older he was eventually let out into the world and managed to get a job at a metal works factory. Eventually his old nasty habbits return to him and he beggins hating the world and people around him. He creates a huge metal contraption out of pipes after work. He isn’t supposed to be there but he was never one to follow the rules, and besideds, who was going to stop him. The contrapion was in a warehouse out the back of the factory, it was never used so he was sure no one would find it. He threw some marbles in and like he hoped, non returned.

The next day he worked as normal, all day, showing no signs that he had done anything suspicious the previous day. As work came to a close, he asked a co-worker to come to the ware house with him. As he took him there he beat him with a pipe and threw him into the contraption. The man screamed for help but was helpless, no one could hear him and there was no way out. He did this for several days, luring more people to his metalic prison where over time they would die or hunger. It all backfired one day as he tried to throw a Man who was bigger and tougher than him in and as a result was thrown into the contraption him self. It was dark and but he could make out the starving co workers who attacked him.

The Police were eventually called and the Men were saved, one of them was very weak but pulled through. The attempted murderer was eventually found guilty and sent to an asylum and would never see the light of day again.

[robins-gay-nest]

an experimental piece - would love to hear you guys’ opinions!

for me, this represents what i feel like is holmes’ emotional side and his devotion to john. the moon/sun symbolism is an important part of it. this interpretaton of the characters means a lot to me in a personal way. i’m aware that some people may feel differently and that there are differences from the more traditional characterization. this is simply me presenting my personal thoughts and feelings in the best form i’m able to create. 

[obdurare-archive-blog]

I just gotta ask and forgive me if it is a dumb question. Why was Hector worried about Jack in the locker and onwards?

Gosh, nonnie, are you sure you want to open this can of worms? Because I could scream about Jack and Hector's relationship literally all day, it's just one of those things I love about both of them.Also this is not at all a stupid question, I am 100% for answering these about my interpretaton.I feel like there are a lot of different reasons? I could answer this better if Silas was here to walk me back through it, it's something we've discussed extensively, but I'm going to do my best and lead off with the obvious: You guys do realize they're friends, right. Because they are friends. The best of friends, even if they'll literally never admit it. See, the great thing about Jack and Hector is that once they've gotten their revenge or a book is closed in their life or whatever? They move on. They don't really dwell on it after that. For example, take the Locker itself."Oh, Hector! It's been to long! Hasn't it?""Aye, Isla de Muerta, remember?" (and this bastard fucking winks) "You shot me."

Like the most obvious thing about this entire exchange? This is the only one like it. For the rest of the series. Hector never brings it up again, Jack never brings it up again, and they move forward.But there are a ton of little clues here and there and left and right that Hector is Shook by how Jack is in the Locker. 1. Hector knows what a distracted, not okay Jack looks like. He's known for many years what that looks like. Because in the Legend of the Brethren Court series of books, this is pretty much Jack the entire time. Jack distracted, Jack kind of out of it. Jack not on his A game. He fell asleep once for three days, no one could get him to wake up, and they ended up in Australia where they were not supposed to be. Like, Hector knows what that all looks like. So when that's the first thing in he sees of Jack, and uncertain, "No, I didn't." that's more a question than an statement to being told he shot Hector, Hector knows.Next time anyone does a rewatch, pay attention after they find Jack in the Locker. Hector follows Jack like it's his goddamn job. Down the line of people on the beach after Jack rows back from the Pearl, he's literally never far away at all from him while Jack toys with the Mao Kun Map, keeping him in eyesight. When they get back from the Locker, he actually makes his move and we have that talk next to the body of the kraken. And then when Sao Feng shows up and they find out they've been mutinied, there's a few things here I want to draw special notice to.1. Hector is someone that people rarely touch in canon. Have you noticed that? All touching is done by him, on his terms. But once back on the Pearl, Jack practically plasters himself to Hector's back, doing that thing where he chews his nails (and that is such an obvious Jack tell to be honest), while Hector stands like a wall between Sao Feng and Jack. Yeah, he lets Sao Feng punch Jack but. That's fair and highly earned (see: Legends books again). He keeps them separated until Jack chooses to move away.2. He tries to follow, when Sao Feng pulls Jack away to see the Endeavour showing up. And when he does try to follow, he gets stopped at gunpoint. Like?? He's not gonna follow for no reason, guys. I'm 100% in the camp that he thought Jack was in no shape to try to play mindgames with Beckett. That fear is unfounded, Jack does brilliantly, but I think the worry was very real there.3. Literally stares at the Endeavour the entire time he and the others are being chained up together (and man does he stand there like a pillar that cannot be bowed, I love it) until catching that conversation with Sao Feng and Mercer. And then he turns on his charm to work a con and also does beautifully.4. When Jack shoots himself from the Endeavor to the Pearl and you've got one Hector Barbossa literally shoving people out of the way to see where he landed. And then the look on his face when they find Jack. Like, "You know what, buddy. Fuck you and the horse you rode in on, making me freak for fucking nothing, oughta beat your face in I s2g-"But Amanda, you're saying. He just wanted his Piece of Eight, right? YES! That is a part of it. And the Court is a part of it. But it's all of these HUGE MAJOR THINGS you see, coupled with the glances they give one another, their jokes, the fact that they literally stick together like glue except for a few specific instances. These are not the actions of a man just after a piece of trash. These are not the actions of people who fucking hate each other. This is the kind of shit friends do, y'all. Y'all know that. You stick by your pal when they're not doing so hot. And that's exactly what Hector fucking does.