#not when something like this makes so much sense narrative-wise

[posletsvet]

Satoru Gojo and the Infinity That Sets Him Apart

Throught the flashback arc that opens JJK'S second season, the story goes to great lengths to make us sympathize with Geto. We are privy to the inner workings of his mind when he faces personal catastrophes of his youth, and it grants us a profound insight into how his mental/emotional state deteriorates in response to a painful realization that later comes to define his entire life. Gege found a way to turn Geto's tendency to internalize his experiences into a narrative tool, the mechanics of his Cursed Technique becoming an apt metaphor for it, and that's one truly astonishing writing.

But what about Gojo? After all, it's his memories that play out before our eye as he daydreams, and Geto is no longer an active force in the narrative, so the arc should be introduced in the first place to shed some light on Satoru's character and highlight certain aspects of it. However, while the narrative goes out of its way to humanize Geto by exposing his interiority to the audience, it seems to bit by bit deny readers access to Gojo's mind until Satoru is entirely closed off emotionally at the end of Hidden Inventory Arc. From that point on, any reading of his words and actions can be as good as the other since personal interpretation is all that is left to us to try and understand what lies behind the appearances (I guess that's precisely why there are so many widely different, conflicting interpretations of Gojo out there). What process Gojo's character undergoes throughout his past arc is, essentially, dehumanization.

Let's take a look at Gojo as he is in the main, present timeline. Pretty much as any other person in Gojo's vicinity, the audience can only observe him from the outside, always held at an arm's length away from his interior thoughts and emotions. Whenever we do get an insight into his mind, it's mostly for a solely practical purpose of keeping the readers informed about the direction which the fight is about to take, with Satoru's internal monologues consisting almost completely of him dryly strategizing against his opponents.

Even Gojo's design is set to dehumanize him, teasing the audience with how much it conceals and how little it allows us to derive from what we see. Plain black clothes, long sleeves, long trousers, high collar. Barely any skin exposed, scarce detail, completely colourless expression. To crown it all, his blindfold -- we do not get to see his eyes. Eyes mirror the soul, they communicate emotion which our words fail to. Eye contact is a primal tool of non-verbal communication because of how much our eyes alone can give away about our feelings. With Gojo's eyes perpetually hidden under his ever-present blindfold, there's an additional layer of protection, another hindrance to our understanding of his state of mind. A simple piece of cloth adds to the distance preventing access to Gojo's direct perspective, as impenetrable as trying to look through a blindfold would be for anyone but Gojo himself. The same could be applied even to his height: people around him are required to reach up with their gaze in order to look him in the face. Once again, this choice in his design strives to communicate one thing: you cannot meet him at his level, there is a palpable distance between where he stands and where you are. Everything about Gojo feels almost impersonal, evasive, further increasing the extent of his alienation.

There's an interesting connection found between Gojo's technique, his need to cover his eyes and the narrative distance that does not allow us to get any closer to his character. It's precisely when Gojo puts his mind to perfecting his usage of the Limitless that an unbreachable impediment settles between him and the people around, resulting in him and Geto from that point on being forever unable to get through to each other. With his technique taking a toll on his body by becoming more overwhelming to use after such a rapid increase in power, it's also when Gojo starts to wear his shades all the time. And whereas before we were allowed to look past the tanned spectacles and see his eyes, read the emotion in them, now we're denied even that much. It's probably a short after Geto's defection when Satoru switches to a blindfold, indicating how he completely shuts off emotionally. Just as Geto's Curse Manipulation stands as a metaphor for him repressing his feelings till the breaking point, Gojo's mental state is reflected through the physical appearance, too. Him physically distancing himself from everything within the world around him with his Limitless technique sustaining an uncrossable invisible barrier around him and his blindfold hiding his eyes from the viewer is also how his emotional detachment is established on the meta level of the narrative.

Since Geto's defection, Gojo's defenses are breached in the main timeline just once, and that is during Shibuya Incident Arc. It's barely a coincidence that, as the Limitless falls short and the ever-present physical distance is crossed sharply with the Prison Realm reaching Gojo, the emotional distance is immeadiately eliminated, too.

All defenses down and the memories of his youth flooding through the cracks, Gojo suddenly isn't numb to all the hurt of his past mistakes and what it cost him and the people around him; all the ache of losing his best friend not once but twice and being utterly unable to do anything about it still weighs on him. Neither is numb to all of it the reader, not anymore. The narrative 'catches up' to Gojo at this moment. It was an alienating, almost inhumane experience to never get a sight of Gojo's emotions when it mattered the most, at the pivotal events of his life which come to shape him as a character and as a person. We were simply denied that intimacy. But with Satoru's physical body made within reach and his mind suddenly transparent, laid bare, the delayed heartbreak is alive and present as ever. The weakness of his human heart is exposed, but it required crossing the Infinity to get to his heart.

The physical distance is only breached because the emotional one is eliminated beforehand. However, we finally get to catch a glimpse of Gojo's true feelings because something within the world was able to reach him physically, penetrating through his Limitless technique. The two are the sides of the one coin, they go hand in hand within the narrative, ultimately rendered inseperable by it. At the end of the day, the body is the soul and the soul is the body.

I've started writing all this well before the spoilers for the last chapter came out, but what we see in it, at least how I personally take it, speaks in favour of pretty much everything I've been talking about above. It's somewhat notorious how little emotional impact Gojo's fight against Sukuna lands. Until now. Until Gojo's Infinity utterly fails to prevent his body from taking the damage. Once again we gain insight into his interiority the instance he's physically exposed to the world. With Gojo's invulnerability ultimately overcome, the narrative grants us access to his inner feelings and thoughts one last time. Satoru's heart is an aching wound split open one last time.

[fefairys]

this is one is important as fuck i see so many people not understand this and it drives me crazy

"Sburb ruins, mythic challenges, and personal quests generally tend to come off as shallow busywork, stage props, or set pieces in a spurious Hero's Journey. Rose either faintly glimpses this truth at this early stage, or she's just hitting her rebellious teen stride. Either way, she doesn't take the surface value of the quest seriously at all, and only wants to smash it apart and loot the secrets. My sense is that the average reader reacts to this impulse unfavorably. Because readers watch the formula play out so often, they are trained heavily to respect the journey of the hero, to anticipate and crave its fulfillment, to see it as something verging on contractual in their relationship with a story. So a gut-response to this recklessness is like, "ROSE, NO! STOP THAT! You simply must complete your quest and play the rain!" What comes with this view is the feeling that her evolution as a character is only being delayed for a bit while she gets some anti-narrative foolishness out of her system, and then we'll get down to business and watch her do her quest, play a whole BUNCH of rain, and reap the narrative satisfaction. There's just one problem: she never does that. This candy-coated Kiddie Kwest is at no point ever taken seriously by Rose or the narrative itself, nor should it be.

When trying to parse character arcs, we look out for certain beacons. So when we hear "play the rain," we're like, ah, GOT IT. That's Rose's arc. Once she finally gets over this destructive teen bullshit, she can wise up, play the rain, and her arc will be finished. Wrong. This is almost a red herring arc. Her quest on this planet, its patronizing presentation, its intrinsic shallowness, is a mirage surrounding her that represents a fully regimented series of milestones for achievement and personal growth, much as society dubiously presents to young people in many forms. The true arc-within-the-arc is actually an upside-down version of what it appears to be. What Rose is doing now, which seems to be misguided recklessness taking her further away from the truth of herself, is actually better seen as a good start to her real journey: breaching the mirage of regimented growth, exposing it for the charade it is, and pulling the truth out of it. The real conflict in her arc comes not from the fact that she refuses to take it seriously, by destroying it and taking shortcuts. It's the opposite. It's that, upon trashing her planet, she continues to have this nagging sense that she should be taking this quest seriously, much like how a young adult may have a nagging sense of guilt that they aren't "being an adult right" by the time they approach adulthood. And this nagging, unanswerable guilt arises from the truth that the regimentation of adulthood is completely fake. It was always a mirage. Learning this, making peace with it, is part of the growing process for many, and it is for her too." -Andrew Hussie

intrinsically queer as fuck, too, btw

[maounteighn]

Overanalising Moral Orel: Clay, Bloberta and the Colour Theory

p.1 Clay

Interesting thing about visuals in Moral Orel for Clay and Bloberta is that in Help, upon the first meeting, Bloberta wears red and Clay wears blue – in colour theory those are split-complementary colours, the are not exactly opposites, so the don't contrast of clash against each other.

Clay's light blue is cooler, more purple-ish, and provides soothing visual effect to Bloberta's bright warm red-orange.

In design, the cool colors can help soften the intensity of the red, creating a balanced and visually striking composition. In this moment they are more in harmony than they will ever be.

By the end of Help, they are married and utterly unhappy. While Bloberta sticks to her reds even after marriage, Clay moves to greens. The are truly complementary now, but also absolute opposites.

In visual perception there's also such phenomenon as impossible colours. These are the colours that are on the different wave length and thus cannot be mixed during the initial perception. And look who's on the list:

So, visually Clay and Bloberta stand in stark contrast and by no means are mixable. As if it's on purpose. You see, it's notable how Bloberta stuck to her colour identity through the series, while Clay shifts all around the place. It's green > light blue > green/brown. As if he changes his personality on purpose to be farther and opposite to Bloberta.

We know he has a crappy sense of Self, but it is also all over the place, how he creates his Identity based on who is near, who is wanted and who's not. In private environment he tries to distinct himself from Bloberta as far as possible. It's to spite her, to show her how much he doesn't want to be tied to her, but mainly it's for him – a way of protection and masking for his Self. His identity is of Bloberta's opposite.

There's also a narrative meaning for Clay's green. It's immaturity, childishness. He wore green in Passing, he started off in green. A short period we see him in blue is rare moments of relative wellness. He is starting to come to his own meaning, living by himself and for himself. He was also trying to distinctly set himself in this world, establishing a particular colour identity. Possibly, if he'd never married Bloberta, there would've been something different in his style maybe darker blue. Light colour and also his appearance and demeanor (a stray curl) is also symbolic of his remaining innocent and naïvity.

Once he goes back to greens, it also feels like he makes a huge step back from his initial route. From there on he either stays in place and doesn't grow as a person or spirals into something worse.

He also adopts brown in his clothes. To work, to church, when they have guests or in winter – he wears brown suit or coat. It's a formalwear, there's nothing strange about it, but interestingly, it's his wear for an outer world. It's neutral, uncharacteristic, a Persona he needs to show to the community to give off the impression of competence and respectability. Bloberta, on the other hand, again keeps her red. They look very homogeneous together in this composition.

Clay's brown is actually a darker, less saturated hue of red. Position wise, they are the same, analogous here. It's also a part of the Persona – unity of husband and wife. They don't clash visually, quite opposite – the one is an extension to another. Exactly what the society expects from a nuclear family unit. When they are positioned like this, they also get along sometimes, they are less focused on getting on each others nerves and more on presenting to the community, so they are able to put personal attitudes aside and actually chill.

The complete opposite is Clay's Study. Here, he's alone. It's and established power fantasy for him, a place of delusion and unreality. It's everything he longs to be but is not. In his study he wear a deep dark-red dressing gown. In this environment we usually see his truest self – his intentions, his attitudes, his feelings etc. Red as a personal colour and as a scene undertone sets the impression of power. But the truth is – he never has it. All the disasters of his behaviour, that are set in real scenarios are carried out by his real Personas – in green or brown. What's hidden – is in red.

It follows him even where he tries to conceal it. Bar scenes, hunting trip spiral scene, Danielle's flat scene – he's supposed to be a Persona, but the red shadows are there outing what he wants to hide.

(Upd: i forgot that Passing, up to Angelas death, is also with red undertone. For Clay red is a colour that signifies disaster and unhappiness. Red is everywhere where he is about to act out, prompted by his misery. It's like and angry sorrow, that follows him. It's such a cruel joke that he even married a woman who is in red.)

Red is a colour of his ideal self but also of his self-destruction. It notable for the way those two meanings always go hand-in-hand. Even in his ideal fantasy he doesn't allow himself to achieve happiness. Red is a colour of two forces that tear him apart and send him into a spiral over the counter of the series.

But Clay's red, unlike Bloberta's, is also unstable and irregular. It's notable how all his colours are on the surface level, its a piece of clothing that is put on something. Green cardigan – a mask for Bloberta, red dressing gown – ideal self for himself, brown jacket or coat – a mask for the community. It's all a wrap for his real self, that it too raw and painful to show to the world. Underneath his colours is white – blank and reflective. It's certainly reflects Clay's shallowness – underneath all that colour is nothing, white, blank space that is occasionally filled with something to fit a the specific situation. White is his absence sense of self. White is his actual subconsciousness. Only time he wears white is to bed. And in his sleep is also the only time when his actual suppressed self resurfaces foe just a bit, for us to see.

What we were able to read through his colours themes is that he is a man with a damaged sense of Self and a fake personality, that is never authentic to his true self. It leaves him feeling vulnerable and exposed so he reacts with anger and anatgonism to protect his core. His weak sense of self leaves his susceptible to many kinds of influence – his initial reaction is to confirm, even if he'll resent it in the end. He always adopts a personality according to the relationship of situation he is in.

So Listen, maybe the suit is just blue or maybe no, maybe it actually represents something. This whole thing can be all bs. I also understand the character design process and how main characters need to be recognisable. We are overanalising shit here, sir.

Next's Bloberta.

p.2

[infamous-if]

There's been some discussion recently about MC that caught my attention because I agree. MC feels like a loser when you think about all of the other characters. When I play an MC who did nothing wrong to Seven it just feels like Seven is angry for no reason. Seven is allowed to act like a child while MC has to take it? Doesn't seem fair.

Everyone has something going for them and what about MC? No one likes them and everyone hates their guts. Aren't they supposed to be the main character? Why does everyone hate them? Why aren't they considered more talented? It just feels like MC is a doormat while Seven and the other ROs are these talented superstars.

I don't want this to come off any way but I feel like the story would be stronger if you made MC a bit meaner or at least made people acknowledge MC as a better singer.

I don't want to sound rude but I'm very much exhausted by this topic. I've probably explained this 5+ times but I'll try to break it down one last time just so people can understand what I'm trying to do.

First, to get it out of the way, we are only on Chapter 2. I just want to reiterate that. The story just started.

It just feels like MC is a doormat while Seven and the other ROs are these talented superstars.

Secondly, MC is a character I try to give as much customization to, both personality and appearance wise. There's a variety of ways you can approach everything, or I at least try to in a way that doesn't sacrifice what I want to write for the plot, but I think people are under the impression MC is 100% a blank slate character when it's not true.

MC is still dependent on the plot and I always strived for MC to have their own narrative arc. The same way the ROs have their own character arcs, MC will have their own, because they are a character in their own right and going through some that fundamentally changes their life. That means the MC from Chapter 1 will not be the MC at Chapter 20. They will be different. That's what a character arc is. Character development is expected. How can you expect a slew of ROs to grow and change and MC remaining stagnant? Doesn't make sense narratively and it seems unfair to MC.

The MC is not a completely blank slate, and that's where people are getting it confused. In the beginning, MC is going through such a change with BOTB, without their family, and on the heels of a band breakup that's still impacting them today. MC is a little down, maybe even depressed if that's how you read it, and they're getting pushed to be leader by their manager. They are not really okay right now. They have to be professional and put on a brave face for the sake of their band, who, if you paid attention to what Rowan said in Chapter 2, are all depending on this. This is what they worked for since high school. MC is not going to flip a damn table on Day 1 just because you want them to. MC can fight, if you choose, against UWB. That's not supposed to be a smart choice, but emotions get the best of all of us.

They are only just navigating a worldwide globally famous show with a cheating allegation hanging over their heads, and a manager who wants them to be leader when, up until now, they haven't been. They've just been friends making music and miraculously having a fanbase. Now they're really in it. They have been thrust head first into the industry in a way that is so big that MC has to go from singer playing with their friends to a leader of a band who may just become globally famous in a few months if they play their cards right.

A lot of their actions are influenced by the fact that their band almost broke up and it's a thing that hangs over their head. Their past influences them. That's...how people work.

Now, if we're at Chapter 20 and MC is still acting like a scared bunny who doesn't know what they're doing, then be my guest. Scream in my inbox, I'd understand. That would be terrible writing, but we're not. The tour just started.

I play an MC who did nothing wrong to Seven it just feels like Seven is angry for no reason. Seven is allowed to act like a child while MC has to take it? Doesn't seem fair.

MC doesn't have to take it lol. I've always given an option to be rude to Seven/try to put them in their place.

People think I favor Seven when that's not true. (Seven isn't even my favorite RO)(That title goes to August lol). Seven acts the way they act because they are not in a healthy headspace. Their actions are not meant to be understood, because they are not entirely justified. Seven has a lot of growing up to do, but I have never sat here and advertised Seven's emotions as correct. Everyone knows Seven is childish, everyone knows Seven is handling everything terribly. People in the story have mentioned it. Their abandonment issues GREATLY influence their characterization and actions. MC has abandonment issues as well, of course, but MC is not as emotionally unstable as Seven. That's canon. It is what it is. Seven has a whole subplot about it.

As do other ROs. The only difference is that they're not so open about their struggles. Seven just doesn't care. Their emotions guide them. They can't control it. That's who they are. I have also said that many times.

I don't know why you think Seven can get away with everything when 1) it's only been 2 chapters and 2) no one knows how anyone feels about Sev because it's in MC's POV. Seven goes through their own trial by fire. As every RO does......thats a narrative arc.

Seven was always going to be a plot point, whether they were an RO or not. They were always going to be MC's former best friend.

Everyone has something going for them and what about MC? No one likes them and everyone hates their guts. Aren't they supposed to be the main character? Why does everyone hate them? Why aren't they considered more talented? It just feels like MC is a doormat while Seven and the other ROs are these talented superstars.

This one bothers me the most, mostly because I don't know where this came from. "No one likes them" Jenna and The Jewels does. Slow Crawl does. Their fans do. We haven't even properly met the other bands. Of course there will be bands who don't like MC: they're competitors. They're not friends. They don't know MC, why would they be biased towards them? Because they're the main character? They don't care about that?? It's how fiction works.

Maya is following the band around because of how much she admires MC.

Orion quit his job because MC's singing inspired him that much.

G listened to MC and saw something in them. Literally calls them the 'Chosen One'

Fans of the old band preferred MC over Seven. They liked the songs where MC sang solo. MC was better for their future over Seven. Hence why it was Seven getting demoted, not MC. I've said this. It's in the story.

I don't see how being the lead singer of a band on a global show at 26 makes anyone an actual loser but I digress.

Literally in Part 2 MC is acknowledged so maybe it'd be better if we waited? Say a good few chapters...?

If you wanted a story where MC is Queen level famous right out the gate and the #1 draft pick for BOTB and has no problems and better than everyone, then I'd advise you to look elsewhere. I don't like that. I like giving MC obstacles because conflict creates story. I like MC having to fight for their spot. It's more realistic, and this has never been a story of fame. It's been a story of their journey to fame.

That's their narrative arc. They grow into it.

You are allowed to hate/dislike Seven. I encourage it. I have given MC the option to hate Seven, because I'm aware that what Seven is doing is unfair. I am not punishing you for hating Seven. And this goes for all the ROs. It does not bother me if you dislike my characters. It means I haven't made them squeaky clean and have made them realistic enough to have people both dislike and like them, much like real life. I get it.

I've always advertised Infamous as a messy, angsty and dramatic story. I've used the term 'melodrama' for it often. I've always said the ROs--especially Seven--are flawed. Some more than others. I've said, verbatim, they are not wholly good people. I don't know why people act so shocked when they act some type of way. Like...I've always stayed true to what the story is. Half the dynamics aren't healthy right now...but that's the 'growing up part' of the story we haven't even gotten to yet?

If that doesn't interest you, then that's perfectly okay! If you don't like the narrative arc I have planned for MC, that's fine too! It just becomes a bit disheartening when people ignore the narrative.

I will try harder to write in a way that specifies my intentions. I always believe that if more than a handful of readers have the same complaint, then it's on the writer to fix it.

I hope my tone didn't come off rude, I'm just really really tired of this. I've had to deal with this since even before the demo dropped :) but your critiques are valid and everyone is always free to express themselves however they want. <3

[dduane]

Hope this isn't an ask you get all the time, but how do you track your progress when you're doing editing?

Everyone talks about word goals, and that seems fine for a first draft, but doesn't make sense to me when it comes to revisions. Do you have any kind of system for setting daily goals for your revisions?

Actually, I don't think anyone's ever asked me about this. :) So no sweat.

Briefly: I think you're wise in not attempting wordcounting in this phase of dealing with an MS—or trying to push yourself into a structure so rigid. ...There's this, too: there's a whole lot too much emphasis out there at the moment on trying to force yourself into other people's writing and editing paradigms—so many of them riddled with bar graphs and "demonstrable" daily progress. You need to find what works for you. More words dealt with in a day, sure, that's encouraging in its way. But are they the right words?

Today’s Writer Take that will probably strike some as Hot (and ask me if I care): Some kinds of writing progress are just neither graphically nor numerically quantifiable. And damned to the least TripAdvisorally-acceptable regions of [insert your preferred underworld here] be those who’ve tried to sell people the idea that they are.

(sigh)

Now, for what it's worth: here's how I do it. Which may be useful to other people, or not so much so. And that's fine, because I'm not editing their novels. :)

(Adding a break here. Under the cut: advice + advice = advice, and some images of text I shouldn't be letting y'all see just yet... but WTF.)

Revision for me is a fairly relaxed business—unless my editor has told me WE NEED THIS ON TUESDAY, which thank sweet Thoth on his e-bike is very rare.

It also helps that I like revising. (When I was a kid, I liked liver, too. And spinach. Just call me Miss Outlier and let's move on.) I really enjoy the feeling of the work’s rough edges being filed down and the sparse places being filled out.

And also: second draft/first revision draft is nowhere near as tense for me as first draft. Because, thank God, at least there's a book.

First draft is where I sweat blood and otherwise suffer. While I can see the story just fine in my head, it's not really real for me until the first draft, whole in narrative and action, is complete on paper/in the machine. And till it's achieved at least that level of reality, I can't relax.

But by the time I hit my second/revision draft, I can be confident that any really serious problems in the novel have already been solved—because I'm an outliner. In the outline stage, potential thematic or structural troubles will routinely have revealed themselves way long ago: before drafting even got started, as I first wired the story's bones together. The successfully-executed first draft acts as proof-of-concept for that structural wiring. By the time that draft’s done, it’s immediately apparent whether the skeleton can successfully stand up by itself. And gods is that a relief when it does! You’re tempted to jump around yelling “It's aliiiiiive!" as the lightning strikes around you.*

However, if after submitting that draft my editor's found something structurally or thematically troublesome in it that I've completely missed until this point, my first order of business becomes to fix whatever their notes involve and submit the fixes. Nothing further happens until the editor sees what I've done about those problems, and until I get agreement that whatever intervention I've enacted has now sorted the problems out.

After that, everything happens in bed.

(...casually noting that for a line to use somewhere else...) :)

But seriously: I do my best revision and editing before getting up in the morning.

Some of this is because, for me, the mind's nice and quiet and (theoretically) at least moderately well rested, right after sleep. I might take the briefest glance at my email first to make sure nothing urgent needs attention... but once that’s done, I refuse to let myself go any further down that hole. That early-morning calm is a mental state I'm glad to exploit, and one I jealously guard. On days when I'm forced to do without the working lie-in**, I use a different approach: when there's a pause, sit down and do nothing—no reading, no video, no music, no phone, nothing—for half an hour: then start editing. Routinely, the quiet I need will once more have fallen.

The in-bed-editing approach also works for me because (since I'm working in Scrivener) it's absolutely no big deal to finish a day's editing on a file by exporting a version of the file containing the day's edits to ebook format, and into my Dropbox. From there, in the morning, without ever getting out from under the covers, I can pull that .epub file into my tablet and read it as an ebook, making corrections and notes there.

This is what it looks like (on a page without too many corrections) if the app you're using is "Books" in an iPad. The second image is what you get when you touch on the marginal yellow square of the note to examine it.

Then, when I'm finished looking over the previous day's/evening's writing and adding notes to it, I go downstairs, get some caffeine in me, and make the changes in the main Scrivener file. (If I was running the project in question on the iPad version of Scrivener, I'd just make the change right there. But who knows when I'd actually get up, then? Better to do it this way.) :)

In the normal flow of things I'll attempt to deal with a chapter or two a day in this mode. (Always bearing in mind that my chapters in early drafts typically run long—often 10K or so—and I'm likely enough to rebreak them later.) This first level of revision is the easy one: catching typos and bad or clumsy phrasings, reworking character interactions that need smoothing out; adding better descriptive passages (with particular emphasis on staying in the visual, audio and tactile senses), etc., etc.

So again: no way I'd ever bother worrying about word counts, with these. What seems to count for more is giving yourself time to recognize, gradually, at a reader's pace, what's working in the prose and what isn't. Rush—or try to force the pace to a given number of words per day—and you run the risk of missing something vital. To me, at the tracking level, it seems sufficient to note which chapters have been dealt with, and which are still hanging fire. (I can change the chapters' color labels in Scrivener to make this status visible at a glance, if I need to.)

When everything's dealt with on this pass—which if I'm lucky will take no more than a couple/few weeks—I try to take a couple weeks off before dealing with the MS again. Sometimes that's possible: sometimes not. The longer you can leave the book alone to let your perceptions of it rest and reset themselves, the better. Distance—mental or temporal—seems to lend clarity.

In any case, for me, next comes another pass, tougher to describe. Casually, I refer to it as the "Missed Opportunities/Complications" pass. This is a thing that one of the very best writers I know, John M. Ford, used to do. One of his editors (I think it was) came across him working on an MS one time, and asked him what he was doing. "Complications," Mike muttered. "Removing them?" said his editor. Mike shook his head. "Adding them," he said.

In this pass you look for in-novel connections you've previously missed making. Some dramatic moments have their impact significantly increased if you've found a way to connect them, even casually, with previous events, situations, character thoughts, or dialogue. (The cheap and easy mnemonic for this kind of thing: "Say a thing twice, and it echoes. Say it three times, and it resonates.")

Equally, events (and people) may turn out to require more complex backstory than you've given them in your first draft; so this is where you take care of that. And of course there are almost certainly character and emotional interactions that can use attention; fewer words, more depth, more complexity. What things do these people, in this situation, need to say to one another that they haven't? And also, what drama got scamped or passed up on because you were just too damn tired in the last draft? —Because you too, poor baby, are human; and that state can, entirely logically, make you want not to deal with any more damn drama just now. Even though drama is the lifeblood of your narrative, usually, and tying a tourniquet around it really doesn't help. You are the conduit of power into your narrative, and your varying ability to conduct it is always an issue… so you need to keep an eye open for places where the flow may have temporarily failed.

This pass, ideally, might take no more than another few weeks or a month. And again, I'm not sure any attempt at wordcount tracking would do this work any good. Because, again... are they the right words? And to make the narrative more effective, you may wind up removing as many words as you added in previous passes.

Finally, with all things taken together, I usually reach a point where (by myself, anyway) I can't think of anything to do that'll make this book any better. That's where there then comes—and again, impossible to assign a word count to it—a time when you know you're as Done As You Can Be. If you've been doing this long enough, you may even hear a strange kind of sigh in the back of your head, as the book gives up and lets go...

...into the next stage of production. But even then you keep an eye on it… because in my experience it’s rare that any book's ever that easily just finished. Even in page proofs, something may happen to surprise you.

Anyway, that's when I throw the book the hell out of the house—because no matter how much I've loved it previously, by that time I'm usually seriously tired of it—and wait to see whether the editor feels it needs one more draft. (Disclosure: this has never happened. There might be a few notes that need to be handled. But another full draft? Never yet.)

Anyway: hope this is of help to you.

But the heart of it all? Find your own way, and screw the bar graphs.

*That line, too, is an indicator of trouble to come. "It's?" Not "he's"? Tsk tsk.

**Usually sort of 7-9 AM. Sometimes way earlier, depending on the time of year. Dawn comes real early in the summertime in Ireland…

[lookmomitsmytmblr]

OKAY so I am re-listening to "Death and The Queen" again and I am having Thoughts™.

I can't find any info about when this drama takes place continuity-wise, but my personal placement would be after "Planet of The Ood" (4x3) and before "The Sontaran Stratagem" (4x4) because 4x4-4x6 take place directly following each other with Donna stating at the end of 4x6 that she plans to travel with the Doctor forever. Donna's determination to continue traveling w him is in keeping with the conclusion of Death and The Queen, where she comes to the decision that the Doctor IS her "happily ever after," as it were. Placing the drama after "Fires of Pompeii" and "Planet of The Ood" also makes sense with Donna's desire in the audio drama to have a break from "the extraordinary" of traveling with the Doctor (specifically, horrific death and destruction,) which adds understandable context to her seemingly being so willing to leave the Doctor after searching for him for so long.

 (Don't talk to me about the ending of Forest of The Dead. It's unlikely Donna would have left the Doctor even if she found Lee. Donna's desire to confirm whether Lee was real could be easily contextualized by her wanting to know how much of her experiences inside CAL were a fabrication, and what the supposed "perfect husband" persona would have said about her if it was drawn from her own mind. Also it was written by Moffatt so it shouldn't count anyway.)

ANyway, what I actually wanted to talk about. Notably, considerable emphasis is placed on Donna enjoying her role as Queen and especially caring for her subjects and having power to help people. A greater amount of text is dedicated to her talking about how as Queen she can care for her subjects than her love for Rudolph, even before the reveal that he is human(?) trash. Her attachment to the role of Queen that marrying Rudolph will grant her is established to be largely based upon her passion for helping people rather than luxuries associated with rank, especially in view of the montage of how royal life on Gorotainia is not as glamorous as she hoped but is still enthralled by being Queen. Later in the story, when danger has appeared, her main role in the story is sacrificing and taking the lead to protect her subjects.

Notably, when things start going downhill and Rudolph starts talking to her about the difficult choices that he must make as royalty she comments that Rudolph is “just like HIM” (the Doctor) and that she went with Rudolph to escape these darker aspects of her travels with the Doctor, specifically the hard choices that go with the role the Doctor plays in the universe (while she doesn’t connect these concepts directly, these two statements are placed very close to one another textually.)

Only when her relationship with Rudolph and role as Queen seems like it will involve some of the same dark choices that her travels with Doctor did does Donna decide she doesn’t want to be involved anymore, which is quickly reversed when she finds out she needs to become Queen in order to protect her people. (I love Donna. In case you can’t tell.)

The narrative has established that a large part of Donna’s attachment to her relationship with Rudolph is potential authority to help and guide people, and that her main interest in pursuing a life with Rudolph rather than her travels with the Doctor was her perception that her role as Queen of Gorotainia would not involve the same death and destruction she has seen with the Doctor. Perfectly understandable after experiencing something like Pompeii.

Donna’s compassion and empathy have been essential components of her character since her introduction, with her wanting to protect the Doctor despite being irritated with him and feeling sorrow for the children of a Rancoss that wanted her to be eaten in “The Runaway Bride”, her taking the time to mention Stacy in “Partners In Crime,” and literally everything in “Fires of Pompeii” and “Planet of The Ood’. Donna has always taken the time and the energy to think of others and work to protect them, even this early in her run. In view of how deeply she feels the pain of others, it is understandable that she would find the idea of a world where she could help others from a position of power without all of the death and chaos and destruction appealing, and her outrage at Rudolph for once again putting her in a position where she has to witness (and potentially be responsible for) terrible things happening to innocent people is believable. He proves that being a Gorotainian royal is like being the Last of The Time Lords. On a smaller scale, sure, but still. 

So the text (and Donna) have set up the idea of Rudolph being similar to the Doctor in role, so what is the difference? Rudolph doesn’t much care about people. He is willing to sacrifice his own people quite coldly.

The Doctor does care about people. How good of a person he is, or how good of a job he does caring for people is up for debate, but he cares.

Which all leads me to this quote from “Beautiful Chaos,” that I cannot believe is cannon and real and published.

Why does Donna love the Doctor?

"I wish you could see what I see. We've been to places, to worlds, to futures and pasts you could only dream about. I think half of them I dreamed up because they can't be real. But they are. And everywhere we go, we make a difference. We put things right, we make people happier. That's what the Doctor is all about. He finds a way for the universe to make sense. And I love him for it.”

Donna Noble wants to make a difference. No matter where she goes, she cannot escape the death and pain and suffering and chaos and nonsense that is the universe, and she can’t help but want to help. And right there beside her, the Doctor is working to put things right too. And she loves him for it.

We have this entire drama dedicated to Donna wanting to make a difference, while also escaping the darkness of the universe, and she learns she can’t. There are no happily ever afters.

Except with the Doctor.

I have so many feelings guys.

[comicaurora]

Hey red, what's your opinion on some modern writing that's very lamp shady? And do you have any advice on how to avoid "Well that just happened" dialogue?

It's an interesting question!

The thing is, lampshading exists for a reason, but it's not the reason it gets used a lot of the time. Writers might lampshade a narrative choice they're insecure about, while characters lampshade because the things they go through in a typical story are kind of bonkers, and we might expect them to notice. If a character signs on for a simple mercenary expedition and ends up discovering they're the long-lost prince of a kingdom they've never heard of, that's weird and they probably feel weird about it. If an ally is determined to 1v1 their super overpowered nemesis with no help from their friends, those friends might have opinions about how dumb that is.

This is a form of lampshading that doesn't break immersion because it's entirely in-character and doesn't lean on the fourth wall. There's a difference between a character noticing how weird their life is and a character pointing out how cliched a recent experience was. In the latter case, the character is treating their life like a story, and while it IS a story, they shouldn't know that.

There's a spectrum here, with "complete sincerity and taking every turn of the plot at face value" defining the 0-point and "complete self-aware uninvestment" at the far end, but healthy levels of lampshading live somewhere in the middle. Characters at the 0-point accepting everything that happens without question can feel just as weird as characters that won't stop pointing out the TVTropes entry they're currently living. It's about what it makes sense for the character to find disruptive or noteworthy. A hardened badass probably won't see the need to point out how bonkers a recent fight scene was, but a newcomer to the Cool Bombastic Adventure scene might be really excited when they pull off a cool special move and want to point it out.

I think this is why the recent D&D movie worked for a lot of people, because while the main characters all lampshade their lives to varying degrees, the way they do so makes sense for all of them. Edgin is a bard and storyteller so he has a slightly meta perspective on a lot of things, purposefully avoids playing along with certain narrative conventions and sometimes responds to other people's dialogue by critiquing their dialogue instead of just responding normally; Holga doesn't really care to understand how the world works and so keeps pointing out that they should just use magic to solve their problems, which is probably the most popular lampshade in the whole genre; Doric and Simon don't get a ton of time to shine character-wise, but they'll both occasionally poke holes in the pretense of the story they're in. The thing that makes this all work is Xenk, who plays absolutely every moment completely 100% straight and is entirely immersed in the objectively ridiculous setting of D&D. Same goes for most of the villains, except for Forge, who's probably the wackiest and most self-aware character in the entire movie, but in a way that makes him feel callous and disregarding of the people around him, like he's uninvested in the world not because he knows he's a fictional character but because he has too much money and power to care about anything. The ways each character does or does not lampshade their surroundings make sense for who they are as people and reinforce their characterization and place in the world instead of undermining it.

I recently watched a couple episodes of Stargate Atlantis and noticed something similar - the main character and, to a lesser extent, the rest of his associates from Earth have a tendency to make wry observations about his objectively bizarre life and the eccentricities of the people around him, which helps contrast against the extremely serious and businesslike Cool Space Warriors they keep accumulating, which helps make them feel (a) distinct from each other and (b) relatable considering all the weird stuff that happens. And the protagonist switches off the quips as soon as things start looking perilous for his team, so you never get the impression that they aren't invested in the story they're living, and as a result the various quips and lampshades come across more as a habit or a coping mechanism than a disruption to the narrative itself.

So basically I think you can get away with a lot of lampshades as long as the character doesn't feel like they know they're in a story.

[leonardcohenofficial]

hello i would love to hear your general thoughts re: tenmartha if you feel like sharing them

okay so many thoughts about dr. martha jones and the doctor but one of the main ones is that despite popular (misogynoir-driven) belief, martha's character as written is much stronger than people give the series credit for. i think so much of her very strong character development and arc (based in her growing into her self-sufficiency, which was always there from the start and demonstrated in her constant analysis and questioning in the search for the most info to make the right decisions) is overshadowed by fandom racism, too much focus given to the unrequited crush storyline (which is also key to her arc, but is also something that she very distinctly and importantly gets over!), and general "she's not rose" sentiment. i think it's really interesting that unlike rose or donna whose narrative arcs need them to become super-human, martha essentially becomes the doctor's equal by the end of her run, if not surpassing him given the fact that as a human, she doesn't have those same otherworldly powers as him.

while i think the narrative of season three ultimately lets her come out on top, i think there is a big cost to that, for both martha the character and for the viewers. even separate from fandom racism there are so many moments of racism in the series that i don't think actually do anything to further the storytelling (literally fuck the whole human nature/the family of blood storyline) and that puts a damper on much of that whole year for me despite loving the characters. i also understand why the doctor (via the writers) is constantly comparing martha to rose, but the moments where martha calls him out on it—while they are certainly there—aren't always enough. i think that fact that martha also begins as fairly dependent on the doctor's validation (which like. makes total sense, she has no idea how all this works and is getting thrown into insane scenarios with no info from the jump) gets reduced to calling the character "needy" which just simply isn't true. this is also something that i think people focus on a bit too much rather than seeing how that particular character trait shifts throughout her season.

all this to say, when tenmartha is good, it's fantastic. freema agyeman and david tennant's chemistry is so on point, and that saves a lot of otherwise mediocre-to-bad writing. from the jump martha is shown to be so SO fucking smart, self-reliant, willing to take risk, and uninterested in the doctor's bullshit; when the doctor isn't just whining in the post-rose hangover or treating her like crap, he recognizes how powerful she is AND how much potential she has to continue to hone her skills, which is why he trusts her so inherently and ends up leaning on her so much during that season. the fact that he manipulates her emotionally to me is equal parts hard to watch and based writing-wise in a lot of the aforementioned -isms AND interesting character development from him because we haven't really seen that type of messy fucked up (human) behavior from the doctor. and then martha leaves on her own terms, which no other companion has gotten to do (clara's storyline feels different in that regard to me). she realizes she doesn't need him, arguably becomes his equal (or surpasses him) in terms of skill, and makes it out alive. imho that's a pretty big accomplishment.

[byoldervine]

Writing Tips - A Quick Guide To Plot Twists

There are two kinds of plot twists that we’ll be focusing on here; a trajectory plot twist and a retroactive plot twist

A trajectory plot twist is a plot twist that changes the course of the story going forward, with minimal impact on previous events in the story. An example of a trajectory plot twist is Hela destroying Thor’s hammer in Thor: Ragnarok

A retroactive plot twist is a plot twist that changes our understanding of previous events in the story. An example of a retroactive plot twist is Agatha and Sophie learning that they’re sisters in the School For Good And Evil books

A big rule in writing a good plot twist is that the result of the plot twist has to be at least as satisfying as the original plot trajectory, but ideally it should be more satisfying. If the twist isn’t as satisfying as the original plot trajectory, the audience can feel like they’ve been cheated or that they’ve missed out on something better

One more recent example of this is Hazbin Hotel’s song Hell’s Greatest Dad, in which Alastor and Lucifer’s song-argument is about to devolve into a full-on brawl. This is prevented, however, by an anticipated new character called Mimzy making her debut to the show by butting into the song, completely overhauling it into a self-absorbed showtune. While it narratively makes sense to prevent the fight, since that would have a lot of negative consequences plot-wise, and the introduction was very much in-character for Mimzy and got her across very well in minimal time, the fans were very annoyed with this and began hating on Mimzy because of it. The fans have largely agreed that Mimzy ruined the song and that it would’ve been much more satisfying to see the two fan-favourite characters fight rather than be introduced to Mimzy in that moment

Another thing about plot twists is that they go down better with foreshadowing; a certain pseudo-satirist once said “This story tries so hard to pull the rug out from under the audience it loses common sense”, and that can be a big problem with stories when their plot twists aren’t foreshadowed correctly. Surprising your audience can be fun, but they came here for a certain story, and if you just change it up on them without any warning then they’re going to be left very confused and feeling like they’re reading a different story. This is often the area of major Deus ex Machinas, where the audience gets to the twist and just has to pause and go “Wait, what? Where did that come from?”

The goal of a plot twist isn’t to make your audience go “I didn’t see that coming”, it’s to make them go “I can’t believe I didn’t see that coming”, especially since it adds reread value to anyone coming back a second time already knowing all the plot twists and now having the prior knowledge to spot things they might have missed the first time around. And if they did spot it the first time around, it makes it all the more satisfying when the foreshadowing pays off. You can only surprise them once, but you can always make them feel smart if you’re willing to give them a chance to prove it

OSP has a much more in-depth Trope Talk on plot twists if you want more insight on it, and I got some of what I said here from their video. So, yeah

[elizakai]

you guys i can’t take this anymore i need to release steam from this pot of killer and dust thoughts that’s on the stove

listen. if you don’t know by now. one of my favorite things to do is bridge narratives between fanon ideas, and canon truths hehe

Killer and Dust. The accepted dynamic is basically killer being a pestering little shit and dust being over it.

THATS GREAT ON ITS OWN it’s funny etc

but think about their ACTUAL characters for a moment. they are two sides of the same coin.

⬇️

i don’t want to hear any of that old fandom “they are literally the same” shhhhh. nuh uh dear friend, they commuted the same (general) action💥

their motives and situations are very different however! which is important when it comes to understanding a character

They both played into an opposite role in their world if you ask me.

Killer partners with chara, filling the role of the player. he’s a lot like flowey actually.

(in killers world, while he is still a pawn of this sick game, he gets manipulated after all, he has taken on the ROLE of the player. everyone else are the pawns.)

dust is against the anomaly of dusttale, which is that worlds player.

dust is a pawn. a pawn that is defying the player of the game

(in the same way that killer is still pawned, dust still uses his fellow “pawns” as a means to “win” the game, meaning he’s also playing)

(but again, i’m speaking role wise)

Killer and Dust’s dynamic doesn’t have to just be haha funny, it has some actual merit and potential to their characters.

Killer is constantly looking for new forms of entertainment. something new. he’ll get bored, and if he’s bored he’ll have to look at himself. killer is very much a character representing disassociation avoidance and to an extent, escapism (huh. like someone playing a video game?)

Of COURSE he’s gonna poke at people. it’s INTERESTING. it gets a REACTION. he gets to have that small power trip of being in control, after feeling like he lost control this is something that’s probably addictive to killer.

meanwhile dust…well. killer acts like his own anomaly in a way. he prods at him, toys with him, he’s leering and he takes pleasure in any reaction dust gives. dust probably would resent this feeling without really knowing why. he feels like some toy, and he’d probably be inclined to even interpret a genuine interaction this way.

this honestly makes dusts inclination to shut off or dull down any emotion make more sense. be as unremarkable as possible, and you’ll be left alone, right?

isn’t that…kind of what sans does? he’ll repeat same lines of dialogue and such when he reallyyy doesn’t have to. he’s being uninteresting. (and no he doesn’t need to remember everything magically for that to be possible. in game he will poke fun at past conversations and dialogue so he’s clearly aware enough)

Killer wants a response, so dust doesn’t give one.

killer wants control and feels like this is a challenge, dust feels cornered and defensive

if they had existed in the same world, it would have been killer vs dust in the end either way.

it’s a big old game of cat and mouse until someone snaps. they need to be given the opportunity to understand their similarities

even in an interpretation where they are in a healthier relationship, in whatever capacity, i think these mindsets would be conflict they may have….

to killer , on one hand he may be OFFENDED by his lack of response. he may be EXCITED, it’s a CHALLENGE. he might take dusts resignation as a sign of submission, which would give killer a HIGE power trip.

he might. genuinely just be trying to have fun?

it could be ENTIRELY lighthearted, and it’s still…rather toxic, considering where that mindset branched from

and we know dust won’t be inclined to say anything. he probably doesn’t understand his own feelings to be frank💀 he just feels gross and intimidated and cornered so he shuts off and sees killer as oppressive , and grows resentful regardless of intent, as these feelings only feed into his crippling self hatred anyways

….thats all for tonight-

[tbhimnoteasyonmyself]

On Tee's Lonely Grief

I've seen people talk about New's and Phee's grief, Pimpa's grief but the gang has never been considered that much on account of their guilt. This episode, however, brings attention to that. Especially in Tee's case. Especially in the scene when he finds Non dead.

And I have to say, I fucking love this scene. So I'm here to tell you why.

PS: For the sake of this post, unlike what's normally my policy, the pictures used will not be edited in any way, shape or form unless stated otherwise. I think it would be taking creative liberties with the photography and it would diminish the validity of my analysis.

So:

Tee finds Non's body upstairs with his uncle's goons (dressed in entirely black outfits which obviously invoke death) very suspiciously looming over it.

So he does what capable and strong Tee, who has to support himself and his father and his uncle's business and now Non (as we saw very clearly this episode) would do: He lashes out. He demands answers. He threatens people. Because that's how he learned to solve his issues.

Yet he gets mostly silence. Arguably, the same exact silence he initially offers the 2 other people grieving Non this episode: New & Phee.

And so he argues with his uncle, makes accusations, mirrors New in the present moment so well it's uncanny.

And then he's alone. Everyone leaves, including Non's body. And now there's no one to perform that idea of a strong ruthless guy to. Now it's just Tee. And the contrast between the act of Tee and Tee is remarkable: one moment he's cold, and the other moment he's completely broken.

So he screams, at the top of his lungs, which is interesting. Because we do see Tee cry but not much. Tee's just not a person who cries. Which, besides being very relatable, is also terrible. Why? Because crying relieves you. It helps you cope, it releases the tension from you, at least a bit. Tee not crying here means this (Non dying), unlike the guilt of what happened before with him and the gang bullying Non

(something he is allowed to shed at least a single poetic tear about) Is a burden he can't be relieved of. At least, not at that moment.

So we watch as Tee screams helplessly. And the environment is so telling. GOD, I FUCKING LOVE THIS SHOW

There's an empty space. Virtually nothing is there with Tee. Because, of course, he's alone in the room, we know this, but he's also alone.

No one else knows this story like Tee does. No one else has been with Non when he was a creative student trying to make a film, when there was life to him in all senses of the word and also saw his dead, lifeless body. No one else has been the cause for both Non's problems and Non's death. No one has liked Non as a friend and cared for him and watched him die without being able to do anything about it. No one in Tee's life knows what he's going through, what it feels like. No one in Tee's life is able to share his grief. And he can't escape it either.

You see that weird ass mirror there? Why is it there? There are curtains around it. But it's not a window. That's odd. But while it makes no sense decoration/architectural-wise, it makes so much sense from the point of view of symbolism.

There's no escape. Even when it really feels like there should be. Because Tee, the guy with all the solutions, should be able to find a solution, shouldn't he? Besides... We come to care so much for him and for Non... So how come there's no solution? Because, we, like these teens do to adults, naively trust the narrative. Of course, there's no solution. We all knew this from the start. We're only here because of this: Non is dead.

So, instead of a way out, a hope for something better than what's going on in that room, we get just more of it. Tee and we alike, have no escape. We're both forced to face that scene, forced to accept it. And Tee, if he dares look for that way out, will only have to face himself.

But interestingly, he never does. Tee never looks at the mirror on the wall. He doesn't even acknowledge it. Which, of course, might be a reflection (pun intended) of how he tries to pass the blame of Non's death to his uncle.

He repeatedly claims he didn't know what would happen, that he wouldn't have brought Non back if he did but... Is that true? As Perth's character (BOMBASTIC SIDE EYE, btw) says:

"You already knew, right?" Because, let's face it, it was obvious. Things could only go poorly for Non if Uncle Joe got his claws on him. Tee had to know that wouldn't end well.

So this scene also tells us that, despite deep down his immense amount of guilt telling him he is guilty of Non's death, Tee doesn't want to acknowledge it. He maintains that position, in fact, nearly all the way until the end of episode Ep.11. where he slightly changes his narrative.

He never planned to.

Right now, he's a new person. One that would not make the same mistakes as in the past but that, despite the changes, is inevitably the one who somewhere in the past did make them.

But back to the scene.

Tee is framed right in front of the blueish-grey curtains and we all know what that means, I do not need to cite the ancient scrolls. But I wanna add that grey is also:

a colour associated with sadness;

seen as a colour of death, as it is literally in greyscale, hence colourless, lifeless AND because it can also be interpreted as a mix of white and black, both of which are mourning clothes colours, depending on the culture;

a reflection of Tee's grey morality because, naturally, while we understand Tee's motivations and background, he did some pretty fucked up things that his good intentions and unhelpful help attempts cannot erase.

And then Tee finds a small paper, written by Non (in vivid blue, properly highlighting not only Non's depression but also Tee's).

And the paper reads: "I'm gonna get out of this place. I'm not a loser." And it hits him even further because Non (at least in Tee's vision, I'll leave Non's death up for debate, I'm sure people will have theories) wanted so bad to be victorious once, to succeed just once. He wanted to get a chance to live normally and it didn't happen.

This, of course, ends up shaping Tee's own path, as he meets White and gets a chance to do things "right" and as he becomes this "new person" and gets away from his uncle. But, in that moment, none of that is relevant because it hasn't happened and Tee cannot know it will, he can only know, with written proof, that he failed. And now Non's dead.

And so, in the last part of this scene, we see a more zoomed-out shot. And Tee's still alone but now we have a more clear vision of just how tiny that space is. And how he's nearly taller than the frame. How his grief is bigger than the space in which it was brought to him. But also how the weight of it, represented by the walls, is nearly crushing him. Another gigantic, and perhaps the biggest of all, responsibility on Tee's shoulders.

Furthermore, as @shannankle has marvellously described and explained in this post about sex scene framing, the framing gives us a level 3 visual gaze which is used to remind us as the audience of just how intimate and profoundly shaping of Tee this moment is: we are not supposed to be here, this moment is Tee's and Tee's alone. Because, of course, he is alone. In all senses. The access we're getting is nearly forbidden. Even to the other characters. Because they don't get to see it, they only hear about it (or we assume they do).

And, to top it all off, the cherry on top of this great scene: all of this happens while Tee is wearing his school uniform. Because, of course, it had to. Because we need to be reminded: this is a teenager. Tee, who's mourning his dead friend whose corpse he just saw and whose death is largely his fault is just a teenager.

[acourtofthought]

Elain and Lucien knew they were mates from the moment they locked eyes.

They both felt the link between them when he reached out through the bond.

It's confirmed their bond is able to be scented.

Based on everything we've been given that means Elain and Lucien are bound on a biological, molecular level, something that cannot be undone.

I'm not saying Elain has to accept Lucien for this reason but it does not make logical sense for her to forever ignore Lucien because he is (in canon) an actual part of her on a molecular level. Two souls sharing one thread.

The only way for Elain to have growth, the only way for her to know herself as she now is, is to embrace Lucien. Not embrace him as her lover but embrace him as someone who will always exist inside of her because he ALWAYS will, jut like Rhys told Feyre in ACOWAR.

She doesn't owe Lucien her time or attention but she owes it to herself to discover why fate, the Mother, decided that she would always be connected to him because it's not something that can be undone even without a romance. From the moment of their bond snapping the Elain of the future was never going to exist without that link to him.

Does that seem unfair to some? Maybe but since when is anything fair to these characters? Was it fair that Elain's fiancé rejected her? Was it fair the King of Hybern killed her father? Was it fair that Feyre was kidnapped by Tamlin or manipulated into a bargain with Rhys or Nesta was forced into training with Cassian when she didn't want to be or that Lucien had his lover slaughtered in front of him?

Fantasy books aren't about what's fair but about a character learning to embrace the path fate has set them on.

Knowing that fate has set into motion something that Elain can not escape (any anti's trying to magic away her bond so she can be free and clear of Lucien are making Elain's journey a cop-out, it's too neat and tidy to say "no worries! You don't need to deal with your bond because I'll conveniently magic it away for you!) it's logical to assume that Elain will have to eventually face that which she's hiding from. She will have to truly confront Lucien and their bond because it's the only way for her to finally come to terms with who she is now and that fact should scare anti's because there's not much that Elain could dislike about Lucien. He loves nature as she does, they share a similar sense of humor, they try to avoid violence, prefer to forgive rather than seek revenge, apologize for their mistakes, are both wise, both enjoy making friends and being social. These are clear reasons the mother felt they were equal to one another, why they were made mates. The author may have given Elain a little fling on the side after her broken engagement but do you know what she was also doing while laying those "cute" little E/riel moments? Building up the narrative that it is Elain and Lucien who are most similar, who share the most in common, that Lucien is the son of the HL of Day and Elain wants sunshine, reminding us time and again that mates are special.

Sure, Sarah could go a different route and give us a rejected bond even after Elain is ready to face the person who now shares a link to her on a biological molecular level but when the author has done nothing but remind us how well suited Elain and Lucien actually are I'm not getting the vibe that's what will happen in their story. Facing her bond with Lucien means finally facing all that she is, something that she's clearly been hiding from when you consider Rhys's words in the Feyre bonus, that maybe she's acting a certain way for fear of disappointing others (and consider that her mate while also kind and good, is also capable of getting his hands dirty when necessary).

[vaguely-concerned]

I have seen people question whether dios apate minor really needed to happen the way it did. it's the 'this could have been an email' of htn. 'augustine this did not have to be a threesome', I hear people saying. and boy do I have an obnoxious amount of things to say to protest this perfectly sensible assertion so here we go haha

1) yes it absolutely had to be like that. It says so on this piece of paper *hands you a piece of paper that says "because I said so and also it's narratively and thematically Sexy"* in my half-legible handwriting. seeing tamsyn muir describe harrow the ninth as a book about being a kid and realizing your parents probably had sex has given me such validation, I am unstoppable now. (to be serious for a moment, harrow the ninth is essentially a bildungsroman, and the threesome scene does a whole lot of thematic heavy lifting around harrow glimpsing elements of adulthood, relationships, and sexuality she clearly finds at the same time repulsive, bewildering and fascinating, and around opening her and especially our eyes to how much john is just a man with human longings still, under the god stuff. dios apate is crucial plot- and character-wise too -- it's a loadbearing threesome in terms of delivering the clues you need to piece together the mystery plot of the book, which is simply delightful -- but even more so thematically. and then the scene at the end where they confront john gives gideon some of that same opportunity to peek into adulthood and go '...well shit I guess', as a sort of mirror, just without the french kissing that time and more murder. the things magnus and abigail model for the girls about love and adulthood? mercy and augustine are providing the opposite-day batshit insane version of that fhdskjfa, you know, for contrast and spice)

2) listen... it gets lonely out there in deep space with your 'legendary unamorous' brother, two infant pathetic baby kitten sisters who you'll probably have to kill one day when you take another stab at god if they don't manage to get themselves killed along the way on their own, and the two people you've spent the last ten thousand years having separate yet connected married & divorced arcs with and also btw one of them is god... honestly a threesome over the dinner table is probably The most well-adjusted reaction one might hope for under those circumstances

3) on a characterization level I think Augustine is actually doing something incredibly deliberate with it: he's presenting John with yet another chance to admit what he did. which is notable especially since the deal he and mercy agree on as a condition for the threesome to happen at all seems to be that they're going to give the ol' godslaying another game try sooner rather than later. (I get the sense that it's not so much that he disagrees with her ultimate goal so much as that he thinks she's being dangerously indiscreet and hasty going about it, before. “though I think it will be the death of us,” huh.)

notice how he's structuring the whole thing: he's invoking the intimacy and love in their strange little threeway relationship and how long it's been by truly playing along with john's 'we're a happy family really when we're at home! :)' delusion (helped along by lowered inhibitions via enormous amounts of alcohol and what I've previously described as a joint mercy/augustine leyendecker themed thirst trap. ah, a classic). he brings up alecto and what happened to her -- or rather, he is clever enough to make john bring up alecto and how she is totally dead, right?? by seeming to make a careless statement that leads there and then acting contrite about it after. he (helped along by mercy, who I think realizes exactly what he's doing -- this is very much a two-man con) brings up how much they all loved their cavaliers, and wow funny how that's been haunting us for ten thousand years now huh :) wow, a lot of our other lyctor friends slash family sure are super dead in the name of some unknowable greater reason neither of us quite grasp and that you won't fucking tell us, aren't they. these are all the main grievances he and mercy confront john about at the end of the book, but put forth much more subtly and not phrased as an accusation -- he's baring his and mercy's vulnerabilities as bait, essentially. if john had, say, a conscience where his conscience should be instead of a black hole, it probably should have stirred something in him.

(also let me just say... the way augustine just takes a pneumatic drill to the TWO tender spots g1deon seems to have and then has the audacity to be like 'oh dear. did that upset him. ooof my bad *loooong dead-eyed slurp of his wine*' is just sooo... he's such a bitch!!! he's the only person who could ever have held their own in a ten-thousand-year bitch-off with mercy and I love him so much. well even if it wasn't all to get g1deon into murder range for harrow I think he wouldn't enjoy sticking around for the 'getting our tongues on god' part of the evening so maybe it's a kindness, really, and totally not pent-up aggression from the last twenty years or so breaking through)

he is all but shaking john by the lapels begging him to just... come clean about it already, to stop thinking he's still kidding everyone else along with himself. it's clear throughout the book that augustine knows exactly what john is at this point -- and all of the most cynical things he does say about it turn out to be distressingly right. john is always less sentimental than you'd think. john wouldn't forgive mercy, he will abandon in a heartbeat anything that isn’t necessary to him anymore, whether emotionally or in some other way. and still he seems to hold out some desperate absurd hope that the man he wants, the man he thought was there, is in there, somewhere deep deep down, if he just gives him the chance to show himself.

(mercy definitely has her own side of this whole thing, I'm just focusing more on augustine because this evening was like. his idea in the first place and I feel like we can Read Some Things into that fact lol. now that we have both ntn and htn to go from I sort of have this sense that the things augustine wants from john are more... personal? more interpersonal? they both love him equally, but mercy's love seems tinged slightly more towards the religious (augustine accuses her of knowing 'only worship without adoration', which like... also the eight house's entire Vibe lol) -- mercy at the end of that book is totally a person breaking up with GOD, not just with john -- while augustine's vibe is more like a man in the last not-with-a-bang-but-a-whimper days of a marriage that sort of felt like it could have been something real and good once but all your illusions about it have since been taken from you and trampled underfoot into the mud and you've had the divorce papers signed and ready in a drawer for over a year now, hell, as it turns out, is other people etc. lmao)

having a threesome over the dinner table with god is one thing, having a threesome over the dinner table centered on the one man and god who has yet again let you down in a way so fundamental it can barely fit into words and who you both still love in a way anyway, miserably, and also just reaffirmed your joint resolution to murder (all under the pretense that it gives your baby sisters the chance to murder your brother of ten thousand years yeah that's why this is happening no other underlying aching emotional motivations here haha)... listen mercy and augustine are simply on a different level, theologically. they've added horny shrimp colours to the religious spectrum. who else does it like them

[ravelqueen]

One thing that is actually super interesting - character wise is how stark the difference between Angel and Angelus is when compared to Spike and be-souled Spike.

Angelus and Angel might as well be two completely different people - the way they act, react and conceptualise the world around them is honestly completely opposite.

Meanwhile, besouled Spike is a lot more aware of his past actions and isn't interested in killing humans for sport etc, but in the way he interacts with the world around him, he's actually still very similar - he's snarky and sarcastic, romantic yet cynical etc.

It's extra funny when you consider that probably this was never supposed to be a Deep Philosophical Ponderance Of The Nature Of A Soul

In my opinion this came out of happenstance: a writing choice forced on the Buffy team, based on when in the narrative it happened.

Angelus was always set up to be this enormous threat, this absolute monster tormenting Buffy, while Angel was supposed to be this fairytale first romance of a wonderful older boyfriend - the dichotomy was probably decided upon before /in season 1.

Spike on the other hand was never planned to get a soul - he wasn't even supposed to stick around longer than the 2nd season! However, the ensoulment made sense with the progression of the story/character if the writers wanted to adhere to the rules of the universe they set up namely:

Vampires are Evil Demons, inhabiting the body of the human before them, and most importantly they are irredeemable and incapable of true human affection. This is extremely important lore in that universe, because Buffy kills a lot of vampires - in the later seasons they aren't even really a major threat and more background ash. If you suddenly introduce the idea that Actually vampires can be fully redeemed, your main characters has been just murdering Possibly Good People willy-nilly for several seasons

Unfortunately, at this point in the narrative, Spike might as well have been ensouled already - he was acting altruistically, out of love (self-reported) and was mostly just helping our heroes, with motivations unrelated to villainous impulses

So really the writers had to give him a motivation to go and get his soul (the writing choices on how he gets there Being Bad notwithstanding).

HOWEVER, they really really couldn't pull the same move with Spike that they did with Angel re: his 180 degree personality switch simply because the audience liked non-soul Spike. They enjoyed the personality and character that had been crafted for the last 5 seasons, so changing him too much would have with almost complete certainty been met with negative reactions .

Which is why I assume they decided to simply soften parts of his personality, make him stop wanting to kill humans and called it a day on his other less-than-cuddly personality traits.

Which leads us to question on why two people in the same circumstances turned out so wildly different ESPECIALLY since William seemed Basically Alright when he's human.

Does that mean that Angel is fundamentally a worse person, only held back by the morality of his soul? Or that he was fundamentally a much more virtuous man and therefore the loss of his goodness had a larger impact, as removing those parts took away more of what he used to be?

That William was a lot more acerbic and mean deep down and therefore not too different? Or that actually William lost way less of his morality/capacity for empathy when he turned because Something and that led him to doing less awful things that would lead to a personality change??

Those are such interesting questions that somehow the show never addresses (as far as I know? comics people?) aside from Angel Being Mad that Spike got over his angst so quickly and it's just hilarious to me that if I'm right this basically was never meant to be that deep and simply just a byproduct of What The Fuck To Do With Spike

[raayllum]

Sometimes I think about the gap between the thematic perception of a theme/character versus how they themselves perceive the same thing. There's not too many gaps routinely like this in TDP except for antagonists — Karim comes to mind most notably, in how he earnestly believes he's doing the right thing with no pretense while becoming increasingly hypocritical — nor are all these gaps negative, per se.

But I think about it in regards to Rayllum a lot.

For example, in their actual relationship, they're pretty healthy. Rayla in particular has struggled with open and honest communication, but they're getting there, and we see that Callum has given her an unconditional, rather than an ultimatum base, upon which for her and both of them to build upon. They can teach really good lessons about taking time for yourself so you don't yell at your partner, that you have to work on yourself and a relationship won't fix your problems, that approaching things together is good and that you should support one another, etc etc.

However, thematically — identity wise — they are codependent to a super intense degree, wrapped up and incredibly dependent on the other person's construction of their sense of self (Rayla struggling to be a good person when she's reeling in the S4 fallout, because what does she have to show for it? Callum trying in 4x07 to push them both into their worst roles if the worst comes for him). And this codependency as well as intense desire to protect one another can cause them to make dangerous or self destructive choices in the name of love (or both), like Rayla leaving to protect him and luring Sol Regem away, or Callum doing dark magic and jumping off the Pinnacle.

Thereby, playing with this push and pull, how they exist and perceive themselves vs how they exist in the narrative (and may be seen as other characters) is well, a lot of fun.

This is also true for the "Rayla as Callum's method of destruction and salvation" theme that's been running through every season of the show, with Rayla being the lynchpin to burn down his old life / understandings of self and trust, and usher in new ones.

Callum doesn't see his relationship with Rayla as anything negative, ultimately; she's loving and brave and she saves people, she saved him, and he saves her right back. He'd do anything not to lose her, because that's the Right Thing to do to him, even if it's not automatically 'the right thing' for the rest of the world's safety.

But we know, thanks to their pattern (1x03, 1x04, 2x07, 3x09, general S4, 4x07, general S5, 5x04, 5x08) that it's something that can and has routinely gotten him into trouble in the past, particularly in S2 and S5.

We also know that Rayla fundamentally doesn't see anything wrong with Callum, either. "It doesn't matter" that he did dark magic before (2x07) and it likely won't ultimately matter to her again. She has so much faith and trust in him and his ability to do the impossible that the idea of Aaravos possessing him again in an awful way is downright hard for her to fathom. To her / in her mind, Callum is sweet and nice (even on the rare instances he yells at her), caring and loving and compassionate. And he is all those things, but even when one another's worst traits come out, both have a tendency to forgive and accept.

Now, part of this is because they have a mutual basis, for lack of a better word, of lines the other would never cross that are all conveniently the lines the other could never forgive (Rayla putting Ez at risk on a whim, Callum killing Stella for dark magic ingredients) which just perpetuates this cycle of support, forgiveness, and unconditionality.

Because unconditional love is great — until it's not.

And I think this blend of "they are actively healthy and actively working on being healthier" mixed with the "oh God quarantine them and their codependent shit together elsewhere for the good of society" is why they 1) have the range that they do and 2) the subsequent appeal that they do.

[snowblack-charcoalwhite]

I think that the misandry by the writers , especially Hess, is something that isn't discussed much. It's much deeper and dare I say, more sinister than just 'men bad women good' because the way she wrote the last episode shows that she wants to convey how Alicent's actions are commendable in a sense that her male children don't deserve her devotion and unconditional love anyway, while her only female child and grandchild do. It's framed as her liberation because she sells her own sons to another woman who is their enemy, but you know, it is good because Rhaenicent and reasons. As a woman, I'm appalled by this. What's worse is that I've seen takes here and on x like "Alicent regained her agency by ditching her sons for the woman she loves, her betrayal is understandable, go girl, you have my support" (and this one is tame compared to some others). Believe me, I'm not exaggerating. And I must be from mars because in my book that's not acceptable, understandable or commendable in any way, just the opposite. The problem, however, lies in the fact that the narrative and the writers' agenda support these vile and delusional takes. You don't even have to be a parent to see how evil and nonsensical this idea is, you just have to be able to understand basic human emotions and family dynamic. The writers and a big chunk of the fandom apparently don't.

Hello!

Thank you for this, really. The writers' (Hess' specifically) misandric agenda is absolutely crazy - and IMO crazy evident as well, so seeing so many people fall for it is baffling, sad and infuriating at the same time.

Don't they see that in HotD the women are the ones to blaim for something only when they side with men in one way or another? Don't they understand how forced, unsubtle and - because of that - cringe all the "you are a woman so you can't rule", "they don't respect me because I'm a woman" and "women suffer while men fight" are? House of the Dragon is one of the most force-feeding shows I've ever watched - and for some reason GA and even some people in the fandom believe it's alright. Media literacy is dead for real.

And the parent-children aspect of misandry you brought up is indeed one of the most atrocious things about the whole debacle. I am not a mother myself - but I have one, just as, I think, the majority of the viewers do. I refuse to believe that everyone who cheers for Alicent to abandon her sons has their own familial relationships so screwed that they are unable to understand the outlandishness of the opinion they are choosing to uphold.

Not to mention that in their quest for showing just how terrible Alicent's sons (minus Daeron - at least for now) are, HotD writers completely destroyed Helaena's personality, even the sparks of it she had in season 1. Now she is all about three things: bugs, clairvoyance and suffering (and I can't believe that the first point has been handled the best development-wise). Helaena is supposed to be good and kind: but what good and kind things have we seen her do? Taking care (kind of) of her crickets, offering a necklace in exchange for the life of her son (oh wow) and saying that she shouldn't really grieve for her child that much because the commoners' kids are dying all the time (how relatable for anyone who actually lost a child, right?). For most part she is just there, staring into the distance and saying something prophetic (or, again, suffering).

Just imagine a real mother saying to her son "You know, sonny, I love you, but you forgot to thank me for the pudding I made for your birthday plus you called my bestie an old cow - so I invited your school bullies to our house so that they could beat the shit out of you, you ungrateful jerk. They are in the backyard, go on, don't make your mommy wait".

Just imagine a real woman whose son has just been brutally killed say "You know what, there are so many children starving to death in the world. Why should I cry over mine?"

Honestly, I am beginning to think that people are steadily losing the ability to connect the things happening on screen to actual human emotional experience - as if the characters (in HotD in this case) are aliens to whom basic concepts that have been holding humanity together for millenia do not apply.