#nuanced views of flowey have been around for a while

[stainedglassthreads]

In early Undertale fandom days, there was a popular trend in fan projects for a while, to have Frisk scared of Chara (and, quite often, for them to have confided in Sans that Chara made them do a No Mercy run in the past, meaning Sans also hated Chara), while being utterly obsessed with Asriel and the concept of saving him, specifically. (Sometimes going on No Mercy runs to seek a way to save him, which... really never made any sense to me, in retrospect.) 

This was probably a reflection of the fandom’s demonization of Chara and generally feeling bad for Asriel. But I think it’d be interesting to explore a story where Frisk’s feelings on the two are sort of reversed. (But also more nuanced.)

If you believe in Narra-Chara theory, then of course Frisk would feel a lot of good and positive feelings towards Chara. That’s their partner! That’s the person who always accompanied them and kept them from getting lonely, who cheered and encouraged them with jokes and witty observations, who gave them dozens of hints about how to Spare monsters! That person is the reason they managed to Spare Asriel, free their friends, and break the Barrier at all! 

Even if you don’t believe in the Narra-Chara theory, I can pretty easily see Frisk relating to this mysterious First Child. Asriel claims Frisk and Chara are extremely different, but their situations are fairly similar. Two children who fall into the Underground and have a huge responsibility thrust upon them. Two children tasked with teaching fearful, angry, vengeful monsters that it’s possible to coexist with humans. Two children given the responsibility of breaking the Barrier. Two children who become the future of humans and monsters... but also two children who fall into the Underground to find a family, which inspires them to break the barrier. For them. 

(I will admit, Chara’s motives are a lot easier to glean than Frisk’s, but some dialogue while saving Toriel as a Lost Soul implies that by the end of the Pacifist Run, Frisk has come to genuinely care for the monsters and desire their freedom.) 

Even after a No Mercy Run, I like the idea of Frisk feeling conflicted. Because Chara did not give them this idea. Did not start the murders. But they also did not stop them. Did eventually help them. But they were also with them every step of the way, still keeping them company even if they had become more pragmatic and cynical, and still held responsible the one responsible, still forced them to accept consequences. Chara and Frisk are partners, but perhaps their relationship becomes more complicated. 

Meanwhile... Asriel. Asriel/Flowey is a very sympathetic and tragic antagonist, but he’s also the monster who’s the cruelest towards Frisk. In addition, he started out wanting to save and help monsters, but by the time Frisk meets him, he’s simply terribly bored and lonely. Other antagonists are all given sympathetic motives from the moment you meet them. Toriel wants to protect you. Papyrus and Mettaton desire popularity and acceptance. Undyne and Asgore want to protect and free monsterkind. But what does Flowey want? 

Initially, he seems to want Frisk’s soul. As Photoshop Flowey, he wants to play out his trauma by trapping Frisk in an endless loop of death, and then claim their soul. People like to separate Flowey and Asriel as two separate characters, and act like becoming Asriel again is all Asriel needed to feel compassion and love, and magically become his old self again... but no, after gaining not one, but seven Souls and becoming Asriel, he still isn’t fighting Frisk for the greater good. He’s doing it... because he doesn’t want them to leave, and leave him all alone. Him openly poorly coping with death, abandonment, and trauma is a great deal more sympathetic and heart-wrenching than previous fights, but it’s still not him fighting because he believes he’s doing something righteous and just. 

Asriel does apologize and make amends, but we’re still left with the choice of whether to forgive him or not. And honestly I’d like to see it explored more, where Frisk has a very complicated relationship not just with Flowey, but with Asriel? 

On the one hand, he’s the one who gets it. Who understands what it’s like to have reset. To try and try and try to get it right, to feel the simultaneous freedom from consequence and heavy responsibility, to see your friends and family look at you and have no idea who you are, to die over and over and over again...

But at the same time... regaining fluffy white ears and a gentle smile does not erase the fact that he’s one of the ones who killed them the most. It doesn’t change how he tried to hurt their new family, repeatedly. He’s probably the monster that was cruelest to them, and had reasons for why he was like that, but it’s not really a justification. 

 (Yeah, you CAN die to other monsters. But I’ve always thought Flowey/Asriel’s repeated attempts at inescapable killing blows, and initial betrayal, would be more impactful. Just my personal opinion.) 

...Overall tho. Yeah. More nuanced views of Chara are becoming more common, more nuanced views of Asriel are... still rare, but I’ve been seeing a couple people who have them, which is nice. 

[timewaster19]

Modernism and Postmodernism

So I’m seeing the word “postmodernism” being thrown around lately and I’m concerned it’s just being used as a buzzword, so here’s my mini-master post of the word. To start with: Post-modernism is a rejection of Modernism, so we’re going to start with defining Modernism. Modernism is basically Enlightenment 2.0 in that it’s an ideology that claims that universal truth can be discovered through reason. 

Now, I studied Graphic Design (and a lil photography) in college, so I’m mostly going to reference art, but my examples are relevant since the Modern and Post modern Art Movements are just extensions of the Political Modern and Post-modern movements. 

So the prime example of Modernist Graphic Design is the International Typographic Style (ITS). The big goal of ITS was to have designs that could be understood universally, and in order to do that, the designer would have to communicate his ideas clearly. Which is why ITS  consisted of sans-sarif font*  (think Helvetica), use of the Grid, and objective (realistic) photography. 

(This example is mainly just to show you what a Grid system looks like and how it’s applied. Note that the lines wouldn’t usually be in the final product. )

(This was one of the post commissions made by Josef Muller Brockman for the Swiss Automobile Club. Even though we can’t read the language, we still get the idea of “Be careful on the road!”.)

I’ll quickly mention that there is a difference between American Modernism and “Swiss” or ITS Modernism, but the big takeaway is that Modernism saw that good design is one that communicates ideas clearly, and that it’s achieved by using order and clearity. Modernism can be summed up in the phrase “form follows function”

Now, for Photography: Group f.64 is the prime example of Modernist Photography. Modernist Photography was about appreciating reality, and this was achieved by clear images (no blur), no color, and use of shadows, and framing.

Cabbage Leaf by Edward Weston:

It’s safe to say that most people wouldn’t think to photograph a cabbage leaf, since it’s assumed that theres nothing beautiful about it. But Modernist photographer Weston shows us the beauty of the leaf by the way he lights the leaf, and how he frames it. He shows how that the leaf has the same soft, “flowey” characterisics of fabric. 

Ford Plant by Charles Sheeler:

Just as with his other works, he makes us appreciate the look of factories by photographing them at an angle that makes them look geometric/ basic shapes. 

These are just two examples (I’m trying to keep this short as possible), but they still illustrate the point that Modernist photography was about appreciating reality, isntead of using photography to either explore a person’s perseption of reality (like Postmodernism, Surrealism or Dada) or use photography to illustrate fantasies or express emotions (search: Pictorialism)

Now that you have a feel for Modernism, we can finally talk about Postmodernism.

Postmodernism, as mentioned, rejects the ideals of Modernism. IT rejects the claim that there is universal truth and the claim that there is a specific way to express ideas. From the Brittanica: 

Postmodernism, also spelled post-modernism, in Western philosophy, a late 20th-century movement characterized by broad skepticism, subjectivism, or relativism; a general suspicion of reason; and an acute sensitivity to the role of ideology in asserting and maintaining political and economic power.

Postmodernists rejected the claim that there are universal truths because people have biases. Ex: No one can say that male artists depect women objectivly because men have a “bias” (sexism), thus their work needs to be heavily examined. 

But this isn’t just about art: it’s also about politics. Post-modernists saw that our political system can’t be said to be objective since politicians and our founders had biases (bigotry), thus we should examine it critically.  

From the Brittanica: 

Part of the postmodern answer is that the prevailing discourses in any society reflect the interests and values, broadly speaking, of dominant or elite groups. Postmodernists disagree about the nature of this connection; whereas some apparently endorse the dictum of the German philosopher and economist Karl Marx that “the ruling ideas of each age have ever been the ideas of its ruling class,” others are more circumspect. Inspired by the historical research of the French philosopher Michel Foucault, some postmodernists defend the comparatively nuanced view that what counts as knowledge in a given era is always influenced, in complex and subtle ways, by considerations of power. There are others, however, who are willing to go even further than Marx. The French philosopher and literary theorist Luce Irigaray, for example, has argued that the science of solid mechanics is better developed than the science of fluid mechanics because the male-dominated institution of physics associates solidity and fluidity with the male and female sex organs, respectively.

 This is also why you’ll see people associate Feminism and Postmodernism: Postmodernism was against the concept of  “universal truths”; feminism added “gender roles” to the list of “universal truths” PT was fighting. 

From Photography: A Cultural History by Mary Warner Marien: 

For a specific Postmodernist-Feminist photos and design, check out anything by Barbara Kruger (her work seems modernist, but it isn’t):

But examples of non-feminist postmodern graphic design are the works of David Carson and Sagmeister! 

With non-political postmodern design: while they may not analyze biases in society, they’re still postmodernist because they reject the Modernist “virtues” of logic and clarity. 

David Carson: 

As you can see, he gives no fucks about order, clarity, or readability. For him it’s not enough to have clear readable text; the design has to make a person feel something in order for the message to be understood. 

If you can’t tell, it’s a pool-ad (try looking at it upside down; eventually you’ll start to read the message).

Sagmeister:

This was an ad for a talk at a college. Like Carson, Sagmeister gives not shits about grid systems, or even readability. But he’s obviously more readable that Carson’s work. The tounges are there because they represent “communication” and communications is what takes place at college-talks. He used cow tounge cause human tounges are too short. 

Also! Check out their websites--even they are post-modern! Carson, Sagmeister.

But the best examples of postmodern design are logos of 90s Nick Toons! 

Such as Real Monsters! 

See: the designer for this logo did the David-Carson thing by making the text look monsterous and scary, at the expense of readability. So even if you can’t make out the word “monster��� you still get the idea that the show is about monster’s. You also get the idea that the show may be scary for kids, just by looking the screaming mouth, even if you don’t get that it functions as an “O” in “monsters”

So I hope this gives you all a general idea of what Modernism and Postmodernism are. Ask if you’re confused--But check out the Brittanica article I linked above, because that gives a great overview of Modernism and Postmodernism.