#on his character and that he actually was allowed by the narrative to feel bad and grief and cry his feelins out

[just-your-average-shiz-student]

Agreed to everything, but I think another aspect of the narrative that creates this double standard when it comes to Glinda and Fiyero – despite the fact that they’re extremely similar in some of their flaws – comes from the audience’s perspective regarding actions seen and unseen.

I see it as an accidental effect (I don’t think the musical meant for Glinda to come off half as unsympathetic as she does to the people criticising her actions, nor Fiyero to come out as unscathed as he does in their perception), but real regardless. The core of it is:

We see Glinda reject the offer from Elphaba.

We actually get to see their falling out, the cruel words exchanged in the beginning of the song, the tears, the brief hope, the heartbreak and the separation.

Similarly, contrary to Fiyero, who we don’t get to see doing all the horrible things being captain of the guard would demand he do --

(I need people who call him a double agent to shut up; he’s been doing it for years! He’d have to do questionable and outright bad things regardless of his real moral posturing or actual acts of defiance here and there, otherwise people would’ve gotten suspicious and potentially imprisoned or executed him)

-- Glinda does get to show the audience what she’s been doing this whole time! That’s what Thank Goodness is! We see her doing her work as a mouthpiece for everything that the Wizard believes (or at least what he needs the Ozians to believe), all while Madame Morrible is silently watching, a constant shadow keeping an eye on her every step.

Spewing propaganda against a woman she not only knows has done nothing wrong but who also has a deep emotional significance to her is, indeed, objectionably terrible, but it’s also a job that requires way less direct violent action than what Fiyero is doing, and yet people choose to focus on all the wrongs GLINDA has been doing and all the ways GLINDA has betrayed Elphaba, while Fiyero’s wrongs seem to go unnoticed or even dismissed.

Because contrary to Glinda’s, we don’t see them.

And in storytelling, having something not be shown is almost the same as it never happening in the first place, at least for the person experiencing the story.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m painfully aware that some people are just more willing to point fingers at Glinda and justify every single thing Fiyero’s ever done because of the usual “Woman does bad thing: Evil; Man does bad thing: He had his reasons” mentality. Nothing new.

However, I also think that the way the musical is structured contributes, albeit unintentionally, to this perception of their characters. The second act in particular has some pacing issues, and I feel like it’s not given nearly enough time to resolve or even explore all the subplots and loose ends left by the first act.

I’m not bashing it, Oz, no! It’s my favourite musical. But I am more than glad that the film format allows for much more time focusing on character motivations and each step they take before acting. It worked wonders for Part One and I have high hopes that it will continue to do so in Wicked: For Good.

[Wicked Act II spoilers]

[edited for tone and clarity of purpose, apologies for initial crudeness and frustration]

Okay, obviously I'm biased, but I'm gonna need the Fiyeraba shippers to please set a lot of your people straight about some things. I've seen way too many people trying to say that Glinda is just a selfish bimbo and that Fiyero is a virtuous and selfless figure more worthy of Elphaba's love. I'll set aside for now the idea of "worthiness" in this context. But let's start off with Fiyero joining the Wizard. Hoo boy...

Yes, he was initially somewhat less tolerant of the propaganda against Elphaba than Glinda was; yes, he was secretly trying to find her so he could run away with her or whatever. But honey: those facts DO NOT fully absolve his actions as the Wizard's top officer, or selfish recklessness throughout Act II. I see so many popular threads and posts romanticizing and whitewashing with "oh but he didn't REALLY join the Wizard, he just pretended so he could try to get to Elphie! It's all for love, and he sacrificed everything for her!" As if the literal captain of the literally fascist forces responsible for the oppression of Animals wasn't equally responsible for said oppression?? Hello? Fiyero really didn't think of seeking out Elphaba in ANY other way that DIDN'T involve becoming *checks notes*... the trusted leader of the troops committing all the abuses she's fighting against in the first place???? Like it's cool and all that he helped with Brrr, and it's all well and good that he planned on betraying the Wizard as soon as he found Elphaba (which took literal years, so I guess we're left to assume he was prepared to just keep doing fascism indefinitely if she didn't show up????), but uh... it's kind of concerning to how eager some of you are to make excuses for this dude volunteering as the head of the Ozian Gestapo??? smdh

He didn't accomplish anything from it either, by the way — like yeah, we get it, he did everything he did whilst silently fantasizing about running away with the Witch he was being paid to hunt. Fine. But I can't be the only one who doesn't buy that as an actual excuse???? Like, guys: nobody forced him to join the fascist army — even with crazy ulterior motives. He wasn't coerced into it; it wasn't his only choice or anything. Searching for Elphaba did not somehow compel him to go and volunteer to follow (or to give!) orders in the name of the dictator who was trying to have her assassinated the entire time. He could have just not done all that. (Genuinely so curious how the second film plans on covering that material tbh)

Glinda made several questionable decisions that can be (and have been) debated, but she is still very unambiguously a victim. Her position in the Wizard's regime was foisted upon her. There are things we can discuss, but I find that many folks need reminding that Glinda would undoubtedly have been disposed of (or worse) if she failed to make herself useful. I mean hell: she wasn't even supposed to meet the Wizard in the first place — she was only there because of Elphie. If she'd tried to resist, it would have immediately gotten her labeled the Witch's accomplice. As soon as she'd chosen not to get on the broom, her fate was out of her hands, and all available options were varying degrees of horrible.

That's not the case with Fiyero. He went to the Wizard all on his own; no one ever cornered or forced him into it. Thinking Animals are people, and having a crush on Elphaba, simply did not stop him from carrying out the regime's orders — for years. It's not clear exactly how long he's been captain at the start of Act II, but the clear implication is that he's been a soldier for most of the time skip. I've seen Fiyeraba accounts with headcanons about him acting as a double agent, secretly doing stuff to help Animals — and that's a great idea, it would indeed serve to make a lot of his actions way more palatable — but until we actually get to SEE some of that (maybe they'll add it for the movie version of Act II; we'll have to see), there is nothing in the story to suggest that. He certainly didn't do a damn thing for all those Animals who were enslaved and caged in the Wizard's palace — and we don't see a single other Animal outside of there in Act II, so as far as we know Fiyero has participated over those years in the near-total removal of Animals from Ozian society. In the name of "finding Elphaba". Not fighting for her cause. Just finding HER. For HIMSELF.

It's fine to have a ship you like, obviously — and there is genuinely a lot to like about Fiyeraba, I don't dislike the idea of them as a couple or as friends — but come on guys: please stop those out there idealizing Fiyero as somehow a clear "morally-superior" alternative to Glinda, lol. The dude had power, access, and opportunities, for years, that he could have wielded in any number of really selfless, revolutionary ways. He didn't. And I propose (apparently controversially): he simply didn't want to. And that — at the end of the day — is (much as some would like to deny it) true to his character. He always WANTED to be self-absorbed and shallow, and all his actions are consistent with that. Elphaba saw depth and discontentment in him, yes: but (and I cannot stress this enough) when given the chance, he channeled that in the wrong direction. He didn't confront that and become a better person — for the most part he just displaced and projected it onto Elphaba as an object of obsession, and put on an even thicker pretense than before.

All his actions — regardless of the complexity he has deep down — are those of a man who never gives one fuck about anything or anyone, except (kinda sorta) Elphaba. But even then: at no time does the care he has for her seem to extend to caring about any of her wants or needs outside of sexual validation from him, or how she might feel about his actions, or indeed the impacts of those actions upon her, her cause, or anyone or anything else. I don't think it should be all that controversial to say: he doesn't think through the wider repercussions of anything he does — thoughtlessness is just one of his core character traits. He doesn't think ahead or see meaning in anything outside of what can temporarily excite him, in the moment. I think people place a little too much weight on Elphaba clocking him with regard to his internal pain, and seem to expect (understandably of course) that she is not only right, but moreover that he will grow from that in a positive direction, based on her influence.

But he doesn't. If anything, we get a surprising inverse: he pretty much proves her wrong. Not to say he didn't have hidden depth and all that, like she said: but his hypothetical heart of gold proves not to really amount to much in practice. He doesn't grow out of his shallowness and his self-centeredness: he grows into it in a way that he hadn't quite yet in school. Where once he was only masking an internal listlessness, after he's been cracked open by Elphaba he decides to be genuinely self-absorbed and deeply shallow, not just coasting by. He performs in new ways — as a soldier, eventually as a "fiancé", etc. — but by Act II we meet a Fiyero who has staked the last remaining shred of humanity in him on the vain pursuit of the only object of his desire that has ever been unavailable to him, and firmly chosen to say to hell with everyone and everything else.

When put to the test, Fiyero sacrifices Glinda, the Animals, and all else that Elphaba actually cared about, to pursue his own unresolved crush from college. Mostly to get in her pants, really — as harsh as I'm sure that sounds. But let me be frank: that is literally all he ever accomplishes in the show. He gives her dick one time, and one of his castles, and that's it. That's the culmination of his years trying to find her — years in which he actively worked as one of the stormtroopers (or even the one commanding them) committing untold crimes against Animalkind (who, again, it seems have been all but erased from Oz by Act II): y'know, the very crimes Elphaba sacrificed her life to try and stop????? He spent the most important time of his life — of his own free will — being a fascist soldier, but he "did it for her" somehow, so according to some, it's perfectly fine. Heroic, even. Yikes??

But let's make something very clear (since my original version of this post caught a lot of flak, including slurs and other rudeness):

I like Fiyero. I find his role extremely interesting (I could do a whole dissertation on him, but I'm especially a fan of the way his proving Elphaba's assessment of him wrong presents a fascinating parallel and contrast with Glinda, which I think is lost on a lot of people). But PLEASE stop with all the misguided Glinda slander and idealization of Fiyero. By all means, thirst! But don't give me all this bullshit about him deserving Elphaba more, or being super deep, or being really principled or noble or whatever else. He does have layers, and quite intriguing ones, but his insides are straw — he isn't meant to have some deep, overwrought emotional core or motivations; he has passions that he acts upon when given the chance. That's it. And that's fine. Actually kind of refreshing in a story rooted in simple children's fantasy but rife with intensely complicated personalities. Fiyero makes it his mission to represent denial of depth and embrace of raw, spontaneous desire — and I for one love that, and wish others appreciated it.

And in all seriousness, shipping wars aside: by the end of the story, it's Glinda who is ultimately vindicated, and has — for all her faults — made the necessary choices to fulfill Elphaba's wishes, bring down the regime, etc. And all that despite herself. She's miserable: not just because of the mistakes she made, but because of her correct moves as well. Fiyero is simply not — and could never be — that person. And that's okay! Like I said: I am not anti-Fiyero. Fiyero's willingness to throw it all away for the sake of sheer, overriding passion is a huge part of what people like about him, of course — and it's an obvious factor in the attraction between him and Elphaba, because she has her own flavor of that impulse as well — but I'd actually argue that it's not romantic, it's his fatal flaw. And thematically that's fantastic! But I just don't believe that it somehow means he "deserves Elphaba more" because he "gave up his life for her" or whatever. In part because NOBODY truly "deserves" Elphie tbh, not 100% (and I question anybody who claims otherwise), but ultimately because I don't accept the idea that his fleeting acts of passion make up for all the shit leading up to them (or even proceeding after them tbh). At least Glinda managed to do what Elphaba always wanted in the end — but I would die on this hill even if Gelphie didn't exist.

You don't have to agree with my analysis of Fiyero and his choices, relationships, etc. — that's fine. What isn't fine is trying to portray Glinda as some kind of spineless traitor whore for the Wizard and Fiyero as a conscientious hero who earned Elphie through self-sacrifice. That's just not the story that was written. It's WAY messier and more interesting than that.

[gremlinpenguin]

Some semi-coherent analysis threads bc my dumb ass needs bullet points to stay organized:

—SEASON FINALE SPOILERS BELOW!!!—

I’ve been dissecting some of allegorical elements of the story- I’m not sure if these are intended or even completely accurate to the story, just my interpretation of how every single narrative element potentially ties together, which is insanely impressive. Some of these are speculations or extrappolations; it’s hard to confirm some things until we know Buddy’s backstory, but this is based on his statement that he’s “never been the hero in any story, not even his own” (AAHHAHAHLSJHSKHSSKJ)

Sorry if some of these thoughts make no sense feel free to me for clarification lol, and I might be repeating things that have been said before but idk. And if i quote anything then I pulled it from the finale

BUT THE WHOLE STORY WORLD IS A METAPHOR FOR ROLES, CONVENTIONS, AND BREAKING EXPECTATIONS

The stories and their roles parallel the characters’ interiority

- chase is defiant of his role

- Buddy believes that his role defines him

- “What the stories want” > the characters wanting to break out of their roles

“Maybe this isn’t the ending that was supposed to happen” > DEVELOPMENT

- difference between who we are vs. who we think we are

- Think we’re “supposed to turn out” one way according to roles

- World where hero <3 villain = breaking conventions and expectations

- Ties in with the roles were given

“Our roles are gone, the world is gone, but we’re still here”

- we are our cores, not the roles we’re assigned

- The world cannot change who you truly are

- The world/roles getting destroyed = allowed them to be themselves

- Buddy became the hero

- Chase showed his vulnerability

Character complexity: buddy is and isn’t a “hero”

- there is no black and white answer

- He’s a complex person who made mistakes that he deeply regrets

- At the same time, he never caused any physical harm to chase- and when he did, he was instantly remorseful

If you think about buddy’s perspective, he fits the role of a hero

- in a bad situation

- Needs something to fix that situation

- Someone is in his way of achieving that goal for what he’s been trained to believe are selfish reasons

BUT THE METAPHORICAL PARTS!!!

Every storybook fantasy world was fake

- literally the entire setting wasn’t real

- The whole story is a giant metaphor

- Roles in stories = roles we think we fit into

- How roles inhibit you from who you really are

We can all be heroes or villains, regardless of what role we’re given

- chase defies his role as a kid who can’t go to college and needs to make money > still dreams big despite the hand he’s been dealt

“Stories just want an ending even if it’s not the one you’d expect”

- direct metaphor- ppl want to be themselves regardless of their roles

- You can’t control who someone is going to be

- All that matters is that they like themself, no matter what they expected

- They want to be enjoyed > people just want to live

The story ending = just living regardless of roles

- the stories are all fake but a direct parallel to the human personality

- We put up walls and fake facades to hide what we actually are/want

- The roles don’t matter as long as we just live

- Roles are put in place to try and create smoothness/structure

- we confine ourselves into fantasy book roles - ie deacon being the helper - without realizing that we have full power to get out of those

- We tell ourselves stories of what’s real/what we’re capable of

-the stories themselves are confining to the multi dimensional nature of human possibility

And Chase was literally invented to defy the stereotypical isekai tropes. Every character is strongly defiant of what someone might expect a stereotypical hero, villain, and sidekick to be- they’re so much richer, they all have motives and desires. And they each want to feel like “the hero” but it’s so far out of their grasps. The storybooks set an expectation of what a hero is - by literally fitting people into roles - I mean come on how much more symbolic can it get than literally ASSIGNING ROLES with the keys - but they all have a complex idea of how “being a hero” fits into their lives.

But as silver said, people love the hero because they tried- and Chase, buddy, and deacon are all trying so hard to find peace in their lives.

Back to the finale-

All the story wants is a true loves kiss > it just wants them to be themselves

- love is love lol

- Roles don’t matter, you matter

Roles > chase never fit into his role

- strong foil for buddy, who fully defined himself by his role

- Chase believed he could choose his role regardless of what life gave him

Chase is all about breaking conventions and doing the impossible

- Embodiment of unconventionality

- First to break out of role/callous hero expectation

Buddy is the embodiment of surrendering to his role

- letting it control him through fear and low self-esteem

- Surrendered to his role because he feels like a villain irl

Something always goes wrong in the stories- people are not meant to fit into roles

- chase defying the stories = rebelling against societal roles and expectations

- Buddy being a stickler for accuracy- he doesn’t know how to escape his role

“Our roles are gone, the world is gone, but we’re still here”

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHSJDKFKSDJFHSKSKSJFJSJSHAHDJGKKSJAHSHDHD

- BIG HEALING MOMENT BC NOTHING IS THERE TO CONFINE BUDDY AKA HIS BELIEF SYSTEM THAT TELLS HIM HES THE VILLAIN HES LITERALLY SHEDDING HIS ROLE BC THE WORLD HAS BEEN DESTROYED SO THEIR ROLES HAVE BEEN DESTROYED TOO AAAAHHH THIS QUOTE NEEDS TO PAY RENT BC ITS SPENT WAY TOO MUCH TIME IN MY HEAD

- I mean come on. Yes I am a simp for metaphorical apocalypses but THIS. THEIR ROLES HAVE BEEN DESTROYED. THE TWO OF THEM ARE LITERALYYYY ALL THATS LEFT

anygay

Dreams by night episode-

- the hero’s dreams come true- but not really

- In real life, your happily ever after doesn’t always happen

- The coffin: Buddy is mentally trapped in his villain role

- He doesn’t know how to get out

- The coffin is an emotional box that he’s stuck in

- Doesn’t believe he could be anything but the villain

- Buddy’s dream could be a flashback

- Blood on his clothes- possibly had to fight other “contestants”

- I think buddy was pit against other ppl but there was one who he really cared about and let down

- He’s definitely missing someone in his life who’s no longer here

- Fighting could have convinced him he was the villain

- Or failing to save the person he cared about

- Could have made him think he’s selfish = villain

- Or survivors guilt

- Mirror = reflection of himself

- Sees chase in his reflection = sees the part of him that he knows isn’t a villain

- Chase is making him believe that he could be good/worthy of kindness and love

- Chase symbolizes the part of himself that’s fighting to break out of his villain role

- Chase gives him hope

- Not even fully aware of his internal journey

- Chase is so clearly a fresh and new viewpoint in his life

- Surprised bc he hasn’t been cared for like that before

- “This is how it has to be” - he cannot break out of his villain role

- It’s been so deeply ingrained in him

- He doesn’t think there’s any way out

- Mirror is dark > conforming to the darkness of his role

Buddy was never the bad guy > he has a very strong motivation for getting the keys back, aka turning human again

- he never lied to chase

- He helped chase finish the stories

- He told him that he needed the keys back and Chase refused

- His pranks were only ways to accomplish his goal

- Trying to get chase’s location in beach boys > couldn’t comprehend why Chase would be genuine

- Used to humans being manipulative and unkind

- Why should he think Chase is any different?

Buddy has never done something outwardly bad and not apologized for it

- so fast to apologize when he cut chase’s face

- He’s aware of the line between good and bad

He never fights back when people attack him

- Just accepts all the bad things that happen to him

- Doesn’t try to stop people from hurting him

Both buddy and Chase have done “good” and “bad” things but Buddy has never had bad motivation

- all his motivation was in self-defense

- Chase also triggers him in many ways

- Reacting to his own past through his experience with Chase

Buddy doesn’t get <that> upset with Chase when he finds out about the key - “you think I’d kidnap a poor child?”

- he’s aware of others’ perceptions of him

- The fact that he doesn’t seem super betrayed or disappointed is even sadder

- “Why would anyone think that I’m good/trust me”

- Matches his original expectations and views of himself

- Probably felt like Chase was too good to be true

- He’s used to humans betraying him

- Chase lying = affirmation that his belief system is correct

Why buddy is kinda mean to chase at first- he thinks he’s the same as the ex libris guys

- Thinks chase is making selfish wishes

- Associates him with the people who (presumably) abused buddy to get their wish

- He sees chase as a threat

Chase is threat = have to fight back

- his pranks on Chase are meant to tire him out but also to look stronger

- Insulting Chase over his weaknesses = trying to be the tougher guy

- Literally boxed and suppressed

- Matches his need to be in control of situations

- Needs everything to go the right way > triggered by his helplessness irl

main reason why he’s mean to chase- thinks chase is privileged in the ways he’s not

- calls him a brat- oblivious, doesnt think he’s suffered

- thinks chase is just playing around, which buddy can’t afford to do

chase triggers one of his deepest insecurities- having what buddy doesn’t (or so he thinks)

- don’t know buddys backstory but it has a lot less kindness/goodness

- jealous of chase but also resentful of his attitude (initially)

why buddy messes with chase - he’s a pretty big attention seeker

- he gets annoyed when deacon is around

- wants his “rivalry” with chase all to himself

- attention seeking = byproduct of surroundings

- given a lack of positive attention

punko confirmed that buddy is lazy > lack of motivation

- people without love/support can lack motivation to accomplish things

- buddy is mistreated > no reason to strive for what he wants

- Could possibly feel undeserving

- Especially if he failed to save someone he cared about

- “laziness” is interloped with symptoms of depression

Chase uses the stories as escapism

- his real life is much harder

- Mom is sick, family judges him for not having a corporate job

Buddy insulting his voice on the heels of his visits to the aunt and uncle’s house- OUCH

- chase is so strong fr I’d prolly react more like franny

Buddy starts saving chase / being the hero after beach boys

- sick day- saves deacon and brings chase to safety

- Jailer- rescues chase from creepy guy

- Still waters- saves chase’s and everyone else’s lives

That’s all I have now! I love dissecting stories and picking them apart, but oh my freaking god the storytelling in this webtoon is next-next-tier. I’m just stunned at how incredibly detailed the characters are and how every scene is packed with subtext and emotion- funny moments, sad ones, heart wrenching ones, devastating but hopeful ones. I’ve been trying to find what makes Chase + buddy’s dynamic so strong between characterization, internal conflict, belief systems, behavior, backstory, etc. and I’m sure it all comes down to punko’s imagination and her unfettered love for the story. But if you’re a chronic overthinker and obsessive analyzer like me I’d looooove to hear your thoughts, theories, analyses, or anything at all!! Especially about the dreams by night episode IM GONNA CRACK THE CODE I KNOW I WILL

[darkstarofchaos]

Thank you for fighting the good fight for Prowl. I just joined the fandom this year, and honestly, I love him so much, and you’ve already put into words exactly how I feel about him. Also, thank you for validating my hatred for Megatron. Between TF One and IDW, I’ve gone from meh to straight-up loathing his entire existence. Like, why is his redemption arc so wacky? It genuinely felt like he got off scot-free so easily, with no one holding any real bad blood against him unlike Prowl. Everyone was just like, “uwu poor Megatron” or whatever, and it drove me insane. It felt like IDW was written just to create more Megatron simps. I don’t even care if I’m wrong about his redemption or IDW as a whole—if the fandom can misinterpret Prowl to death, then I can yap about how much I hate Megatron’s redemption arc and whole existence, lmao. I’ll never get over how a literal genocidal warlord somehow got more support and sympathy points than Prowl. Please, give me a Megatron redemption where he actually has to work for it—not one handed to him on a silver platter by an idiotic fool. it feels so undeserved. I want MEGATRON to be punched by many of his victims. Even Starscream, his number one punching bag lived a miserable life in Cybertron. I’ll never agree that IDW was a masterpiece. I hate that shit so much, lol. Anyway, where was I? Oh, right—just wanted to say how much I love reading your posts about Prowl. Keep doing what you’re doing. :)

You're very welcome! Prowl is easily my favorite Autobot, and the way he's treated by both the fandom and the IDW narrative makes me want to bite people. Especially when compared to other characters who are just as bad if not worse (I saw a post when Prowl was confirmed for EarthSpark that said not making him a cop would be bad because it would be ignoring his history of police brutality, and I was just like. Prowl and Orion worked together as cops for a while, guess which one of them repeatedly yelled at the other for using violence. Not that Prowl's record is completely clean, but the hero cop who advocates for violence is a way bigger problem than the social outcast who looked at the system and saw corruption).

Anyway.

I must admit that I actually like Megatron in general, but I really hate this recent trend of Megatron being the only Decepticon canon cares about. TF One could have given us two Bots and two Cons, but not a single other Decepticon got more than maybe five minutes of screentime. EarthSpark made him the only Decepticon who changed sides, then doubled down on the worst elements of his "redemption" by making him the only Decepticon who's allowed to be sympathetic. Every crossover I've seen between Transformers and various video games only includes Megatron as the Decepticon representation.

(Also, unpopular opinion, but I feel like Megatron having a history with Optimus is the weakest part of his character in almost every continuity. Especially in IDW, where it's literally a Get Out of Jail Free card).

And of course, as soon as Prowl shows up in EarthSpark, people are complaining about him getting on Megatron's case. Even though he was actually really open-minded about Megatron's presence, and just accepted that he'd truly changed sides even if he didn't personally trust him. I was over here expecting an entire episode based around Prowl fighting with others about Megatron's trustworthiness, and people had a problem with a couple openly antagonistic comments.

Primus forbid a mech do anything, I guess.

[clegfly]

Getting REAL sick and tired of how omori TikTok views sunny.

Like, they view any scene of him being emotionally vulnerable, affectionate, or even just making an expression outside of just being completely neutral as “mischaracterised”. He’s not some cool, stoic, unwavering badass, he is a traumatised teenager. Don’t cry whenever he dares to give his friend a hug or (god forbid) be SAD about something??? Isn’t like. Part of the point of his development about him allowing himself to break down the repressive walls he built when he shut himself in? And being able to rely on his real friends instead of imaginary versions? And isn’t the game like. Meant to SHOW that he still cares about them despite isolating himself?

It’s really stupid to get mad at a character like that showing emotion or affection personally, especially since he’s not used to expressing it properly after so long. But that’s just me

[luniviravosshipper]

POV: You’re sad and wanting comfort but the character you’d usually find comfort in was deemed unlikabled and totally undeserving of love by the narrative. So instead of feeling comfort thinking of that character now you just feel even worse. Because every time you try to immerse yourself back into the story they came from you have to constantly be reminded by it that they never got to receive any sort of affection and the story wanted the audience to know the reason was because it never felt they deserved any. Even when intentionally making them sympathetic at moments, at the end it’s clear that they were always planning on kicking the dog with them.

[amelikos]

Thinking about the portrayal of ancestry in Horizons.

[impossible-rat-babies]

I’m replaying shb and man. man ranjit is still kinda. kinda a way to me

[bnnylvpn]

They should make bnha 2 but it's like Steven universe future and Izuku has multiple breakdowns on screen

[rivilu-2-electric-boogaloo]

...

[myrling-art]

I need people to understand how fundamentally important Essek Thelyss is for people like me.

But I am also not super comfortable flaunting my squishy emotions for everyone to see, so we'll be hiding them in the tags because we are so brave but also very soft.

FINAL POLL

Propaganda

Gilmore:

He's fabulous, he's powerful, he dueled the Cinder King and lived to tell the tale, he's fucking gorgeous, he had a really close relationship with Vox Machina that survived being rejected by Vax romantically, he held the barrier over Whitestone and smushed an assassin and over 30 years later he's still Glorious

Essek:

He's gay he's demi he's goth he's a war criminal he's got floaty magic he's got it all, folks

*picture has been changed for a second time. Stop complaining, please*

[she-who-fights-and-writes]

“Show, Don’t Tell”…But This Time Someone Explains It

If you’ve ever been on the hunt for writing advice, you've definitely seen the phrase “Show, Don’t Tell.”

Writeblr coughs up these three words on the daily; it’s often considered the “Golden Rule” of writing. However, many posts don't provide an in-depth explanation about what this "Golden Rule" means (This is most likely to save time, and under the assumption that viewers are already informed).

More dangerously, some posts fail to explain that “Show, Don’t Tell” occasionally doesn’t apply in certain contexts, toeing a dangerous line by issuing a blanket statement to every writing situation. 

The thing to take away from this is: “Show, Don’t Tell” is an essential tool for more immersive writing, but don't feel like a bad writer if you can’t make it work in every scenario (or if you can’t get the hang of it!)

1. What Does "Show, Don't Tell" Even Mean?

“Show, Don’t Tell” is a writing technique in which the narrative or a character’s feelings are related through sensory details rather than exposition. Instead of telling the reader what is happening, the reader infers what is happening due to the clues they’ve been shown.

EXAMPLE 1:

Telling: The room was very cold. Showing: She shivered as she stepped into the room, her breath steaming in the air.

EXAMPLE 2:

Telling: He was furious. Showing: He grabbed the nearest book and hurled it against the wall, his teeth bared and his eyes blazing.

EXAMPLE 3 ("SHOW, DON'T TELL" DOESN'T HAVE TO MEAN "WRITE A LOT MORE")

Telling: The room hadn't been lived in for a very long time. Showing: She shoved the door open with a spray of dust.

Although the “showing” sentences don’t explicitly state how the characters felt, you as the reader use context clues to form an interpretation; it provides information in an indirect way, rather than a direct one.

Because of this, “Show, Don’t Tell” is an incredibly immersive way to write; readers formulate conclusions alongside the characters, as if they were experiencing the story for themselves instead of spectating. 

As you have probably guessed, “showing” can require a lot more words (as well as patience and effort). It’s a skill that has to be practiced and improved, so don’t feel discouraged if you have trouble getting it on the first try!

2. How Do I Use “Show, Don’t Tell” ?

There are no foolproof parameters about where you “show” and not “tell" or vice versa; it’s more of a writing habit that you develop rather than something that you selectively decide to employ.

In actuality, most stories are a blend of both showing and telling, and more experienced writers instinctively switch between one and another to cater to their narrative needs. You need to find a good balance of both in order to create a narrative that is both immersive and engaging.

i. Help When Your Writing Feels Bare-Bones/Soulless/Boring

Your writing is just not what you’ve pictured in your head, no matter how much you do it over. Conversations are stilted. The characters are flat. The sentences don’t flow as well as they do in the books you've read. What’s missing?

It’s possibly because you’ve been “telling” your audience everything and not “showing”! If a reader's mind is not exercised (i.e. they're being "spoon-fed" all of the details), your writing may feel boring or uninspired!

Instead of saying that a room was old and dingy, maybe describe the peeling wallpaper. The cobwebs in the corners. The smell of dust and old mothballs. Write down what you see in your mind's eye, and allow your audience to formulate their own interpretations from that. (Scroll for a more in-depth explanation on HOW to develop this skill!)

ii. Add More Depth and Emotion to Your Scenes

Because "Show, Don't Tell" is a more immersive way of writing, a reader is going to feel the narrative beats of your story a lot more deeply when this rule is utilized.

Describing how a character has fallen to their knees sobbing and tearing our their hair is going to strike a reader's heart more than saying: "They were devastated."

Describing blood trickling through a character's fingers and staining their clothes will seem more dire than saying: "They were gravely wounded."

iii. Understand that Sometimes Telling Can Fit Your Story Better

Telling can be a great way to show your characters' personalities, especially when it comes to first-person or narrator-driven stories. Below, I've listed a few examples; however, this list isn't exclusive or comprehensive!

Initial Impressions and Character Opinions

If a character describes someone's outfit as "gaudy" or a room as "absolutely disgusting," it can pack more of a punch about their initial impression, rather than describing the way that they react (and can save you some words!). In addition, it can provide some interesting juxtaposition (i.e. when a character describes a dog as "hideous" despite telling their friend it looks cute).

2. Tone and Reader Opinions

Piggybacking off of the first point, you can "tell, not show" when you want to be certain about how a reader is supposed to feel about something. "Showing" revolves around readers drawing their own conclusions, so if you want to make sure that every reader draws the same conclusion, "telling" can be more useful! For example, if you describe a character's outfit as being a turquoise jacket with zebra-patterned pants, some readers may be like "Ok yeah a 2010 Justice-core girlie is slaying!" But if you want the outfit to come across as badly arranged, using a "telling" word like "ridiculous" or "gaudy" can help set the stage.

3. Pacing

"Show, don't tell" can often take more words; after all, describing a character's reaction is more complicated than stating how they're feeling. If your story calls for readers to be focused more on the action than the details, such as a fight or chase scene, sometimes "telling" can serve you better than "showing." A lot of writers have dedicated themselves to the rule "tell action, show emotion," but don't feel like you have to restrict yourself to one or the other.

iv. ABOVE ALL ELSE: Getting Words on the Page is More Important!

If you’re stuck on a section of your story and just can’t find it in yourself to write poetic, flowing prose, getting words on the paper is more important than writing something that’s “good.” If you want to be able to come back and fix it later, put your writing in brackets that you can Ctrl + F later.

Keeping your momentum is the hardest part of writing. Don't sacrifice your inspiration in favor of following rules!

3. How Can I Get Better at “Show, Don’t Tell”?

i. Use the Five Senses, and Immerse Yourself!

Imagine you’re the protagonist, standing in the scene that you have just created. Think of the setting. What are things about the space that you’d notice, if you were the one in your character’s shoes?

Smell? Hear? See? Touch? Taste?

Sight and sound are the senses that writers most often use, but don’t discount the importance of smell and taste! Smell is the most evocative sense, triggering memories and emotions the moment someone walks into the room and has registered what is going on inside—don’t take it for granted. And even if your character isn’t eating, there are some things that can be “tasted” in the air.

EXAMPLE:

TELLING: She walked into the room and felt disgusted. It smelled, and it was dirty and slightly creepy. She wished she could leave. SHOWING: She shuffled into the room, wrinkling her nose as she stepped over a suspicious stain on the carpet. The blankets on the bed were moth-bitten and yellowed, and the flowery wallpaper had peeled in places to reveal a layer of blood-red paint beneath…like torn cuticles. The stench of cigarettes and mildew permeated the air. “How long are we staying here again?” she asked, flinching as the door squealed shut. 

The “showing” excerpt gives more of an idea about how the room looks, and how the protagonist perceives it. However, something briefer may be more suited for writers who are not looking to break the momentum in their story. (I.e. if the character was CHASED into this room and doesn’t have time to take in the details.)

ii. Study Movies and TV Shows: Think like a Storyteller, Not Just a Writer

Movies and TV shows quite literally HAVE TO "show, and not tell." This is because there is often no inner monologue or narrator telling the viewers what's happening. As a filmmaker, you need to use your limited time wisely, and make sure that the audience is engaged.

Think about how boring it would be if a movie consisted solely of a character monologuing about what they think and feel, rather than having the actor ACT what they feel.

(Tangent, but there’s also been controversy that this exposition/“telling” mindset in current screenwriting marks a downfall of media literacy. Examples include the new Percy Jackson and Avatar: The Last Airbender remakes that have been criticized for info-dumping dialogue instead of “showing.”)

If you find it easy to envision things in your head, imagine how your scene would look in a movie. What is the lighting like? What are the subtle expressions flitting across the actors' faces, letting you know just how they're feeling? Is there any droning background noise that sets the tone-- like traffic outside, rain, or an air conditioner?

How do the actors convey things that can't be experienced through a screen, like smell and taste?

Write exactly what you see in your mind's eye, instead of explaining it with a degree of separation to your readers.

iii. Listen to Music

I find that because music evokes emotion, it helps you write with more passion—feelings instead of facts! It’s also slightly distracting, so if you’re writing while caught up in the music, it might free you from the rigid boundaries you’ve put in place for yourself.

Here’s a link to my master list of instrumental writing playlists!

iv. Practice, Practice, Practice! And Take Inspiration from Others!

“Show Don’t Tell” is the core of an immersive scene, and requires tons of writing skills cultivated through repeated exposure. Like I said before, more experienced writers instinctively switch between showing and telling as they write— but it’s a muscle that needs to be constantly exercised!

If I haven’t written in a while and need to get back into the flow of things, I take a look at a writing prompt, and try cultivating a scene that is as immersive as possible! Working on your “Show, Don’t Tell” skills by practicing writing short, fun one-shots can be much less restrictive than a lengthier work.

In addition, get some inspiration and study from reading the works of others, whether it be a fanfiction or published novel!

If you need some extra help, feel free to check out my Master List of Writing Tips and Advice, which features links to all of my best posts, each of them categorized !

Hope this helped, and happy writing!

[secriden]

one reason i think liu qingge has such great potential is that he's one of the only characters entirely free from the PIDM narrative. because he dies early in PIDM, sqq isn't coming into every conversation and interaction expecting lqg to adhere to a preconceived script. this allows sqq to actually see lqg as a person and for his words and actions to be taken at face value.

i just think this is great potential for sqq to still be completely oblivious or in denial about lbh and yqy's attentions (because he's so fixated on how bad/complicated PIDM!sqq's relationships are with them) whilst also catching wind of lqg's growing feelings for him because he isn't hampered by any preconceived notions of what they're dynamic "should" be.

so give me sqq noticing the way lqg's mannerism soften around him, how his gruffness changes, how he spends more time just having tea with sqq even after his meridians have been cleansed as they start to have civil conversation about sect business. recognising lqg's care in returning his fans; seeking common ground over their shared love of monster hunting (even if lqg just cares about fighting them, can he maybe smash them in such a way that shixiong can study them afterwards?) and discussions on cultivation techniques and the differences between bai zhan and qing jing styles.

sqq who is so just so grateful to have someone in his corner, someone he feels safe with, who he doesn't have to second guess during every conversation. someone who was never supposed to be around by this point in the narrative, and so is entirely shen qingqui's.

[sammygender]

i think im officially an ats fan. something just clicked

[understandableparadox]

a comprehensive list of everything wrong with hazbin hotel.

quick note before i lose myself in madness, my standards for helluvaboss are non existent because its a free show on youtube. also i kinda like helluvaboss and i will indulge in any bias i damn well please.

oh and spoilers. i guess.

the greater narrative of the entire season is "White lady civilize inner city hoodlum". ex: The blind side. rich girl, affluent family yadda yadda.

the story is set up to be like amphibia, owl house, svtfoe, steven universe, that being starting as something episodic then transforming into story driven narrative. why? because we know the benefits and drawbacks, episodic starts allows us to wander the world, it allows us to understand the dynamics, we are not forced to reckon with anything because there is no deadline. characters are allowed to bloom and shine and the audience can actually get attached.

the source material is Vary Clearly formed from remnants of something out of a middle school edgelord narrative. the usage of transformation, the big spooky grins, the "and then i smile as my eyes glow and-"-isms which in most cases i don't mind because in some instances but in a vary Particular case its astoundingly annoying and that annoyance is like a mold, shit spreads quick.

the color Red. as a lover of homestuck cherubs and karkat and aradia, as someone who fucking loves the color red, it is so painful to say but holy shit tone it the fuck down, i know its hell but their are so many other colors that you can use, its everywhere, the streets, the air, the windows, the screens, the characters, i know the pride ring is represented with red but change up the palates every so often for backgrounds

the rush, this ties into the second point made but i think the story itself is rushed. we know everything way to early. i know way to much and it makes it hard to care about anything because im still trying to digest the last chunk of info. "oh ok, so they clear out hell once a year. oh hell has a heaven embassy? ok. oh that adam the angel, i though he wou- oh its every 6 months now. wait the exterminators die a lot? then why is everyone sca- people in hell already have weapons that can kill angels? w- oh we are in heaven now, ok ma- no one in heaven except for the elites know the exterminations occur? how do-" and its that, just this incessant rush to explain everything to you. notably that's just the god damn spark notes, we need to know everything about the characters now, every single bit of their story, their insecurities, what charlie needs to fix, how she can fix them, the major bad guys, everything. you are never allowed to dwell on a character because we need to rush towards something else. it almost feels like this should have been like... season three, it would have been a fantastic season three if you dropped the introductions honestly.

the concept of redemption. for a story of redemption to work you need to look at three things. What is there crime, Do they want to change, What is preventing them from changeing? there is only one single character that has a notable path of redemption, angel dust, but if you look through their story it feels off. What Exactly is he guilty of? he has sex, does drugs and drinks. his apparent nymphomania is tied to his sad backstory as someone forced into the sex industry so how is that their fault? then if you think about it you start to spiral and notice "hey why are most of these people in hell?" like sure some of them may deserve punishment but then you see the fucking dichotomy and its like "I was a inventor in england and died of the fucking plague, i may have made evil little contraption hoohoohoo" vs "I was a cannibal, a full on cannibal, i fucking killed people and ate them and then someone shot me". ONE OF THESE THINGS ARE A LITTLE MORE FUCKING EXTREME. i'm going to go fucking nuts, the thing they went to heaven with when presenting a case to angels on the idea that redemption and becoming a better person is actually real was angel dust not drinking at a party and not having sex with consenting adults and i want to go fucking insane. WHAT IS THE CRIME, WHO IS THROWING THE BOOK, WHAT DOES THE BOOK INTEL, ARE WE ON GOOD PLACE RULES?! half the cast dont Need redemption they need fucking help, and the other half of the cast do need redemption but they do not seek it making the point moot. sir pentious acts like he has the brain of a hyper intelligent toddler tossing about toys, its almost like he did his one bad thing of spying and then got caught, sank his little diddy about forgiveness and second chances and become a null point through out the rest of the series, sure their was Some weight to him sacrificing himself, he was a decently funny character and he had good moments but him popping up in heaven felt like a fore gone conclusion, he didn't deserve to be in hell so why do i care that he is suddenly in heaven? because its working on the concept the good place already made. no one actually deserves eternal punishment they just need help processing what makes them a dick, but instead of looking at all the parts of the afterlife that make it bad, inefficient and then creating and trying ideas to see if it work instead over a few seasons, we crash dick first into all the major plot points in regards to that and say "tada, we fixed it.".

having a sub-plot about sexual assault and its victims then having multiple sexual assault related gag ruins your point.

don't make a bunch of stereotypically jewish characters into cannibals, that was a big thing, really shouldn't have to say it.

if you are going to make a character black, make them black, you can say alastor was black but sweet seren-fucking-dippity that's not a black man.

pot meet kettle but yeah the cursing could be a little less liberal. maybe just blue hair or the pronouns, not both.

there is a very distinctive art deco/jazz aesthetic which normally i love but i feel as though it is not used to its full extent and in some cases really hurts the character design in and of itself.

this is a vary obvious bit but the story is a million times more interested in gay men then it is of lesbians, which culminates in this insane thing where the writers clearly have more talent or perhaps it would be more abt to say practice writing male gay pining then they are with lesbian pining. which i personally think is hilarious because i did not know you could min max fujoshi-ism that hard.

this next section is more to do with each character on a fundamental level, for the sake of brevity whatever there is left, i'm just doing ones with speaking roles.

13. Charlie:

(see what i mean about that red thing?)

as originally stated charlie fits rather comfortably into every white saviour narrative, though that seems to be part of her joke. though i'm not entirely sure how much of a joke it can be when its rewarded and expected to advance the plot.

her character design says nothing, it has the motif of old puppets or dolls, she wears something vaguely similar to service suits, her demonic form is just some extra horns.not to say every character needs to have their life on a clothes rack but some more snake and goat imagery would be nice

its not the chol design of charlie with snake hair, not an actual problem but its a problem to me, damn you @cholvoq for ruining my ability to look at any of the characters without wishing i was seeing your designs instead.

character wise aside from the white savoir bit, i'm having a bit of trouble understanding what the arc of the character is. she is shown to be naive, someone who doesn't understand how the world works but everytime she says something its something astoundingly clear like "people can actually get better". and its treated like someone demanded faygo in every water fountain. is the joke that the world around her to cynical or is so to naive? please pick one or the other.

now if you know me, you know i fucking hate overpowered characters with a blinding passion, one that would set alit the god damn abyss but in this one special instance, i feel like its warranted, she's the direct descendant of fucking God, she can swing her weight around a little, i mean god damn. she in so many instances looks like shes cowering so often, why would the daughter of lucifer get backed down by some rando pimp? why wasn't she the one to fight adam? sure you can say she is young but how young? her parents were there since pre-abrahamic times, most of the characters showed up in hell in the 1900s, some of them showed up in the 1600s, how old is charlie??? how long does it take for her to learn how to be strong? The story does not suffer if charlie is strong and knows she is strong. it can easily be a case of "i don't believe in violence to a weird degree". fit it into her apparent naivety about the world to believe that violence is never the answer even when dealing with a being that is unilaterally horrible and abusive and monstrous.

she ga- no im kidding, i do think her romance was waysided a bit, it would have been fine to have more scenes of them togather and in love you know?

14. Vaggie

why did you name the lesbian vaggie...? Don't do that maybe?

I like how her design is almost moth like but again i feel as though you could have amped that up.

she feels as though someone tried to combine undyne and pearl from steven universe, same story beats and design elements. it makes it hard to really distinguish her as a character.

i honestly dont have much to say about her. she is fine.

christ kill me, lets just get the big one out of the way

15. Alastor.

God Damn

where to start.

"alastor is mixed race" mixed with fucking what? concrete? there is not a single black feature on that creature, now im not saying you have to make him a png of louie armstrong but it wouldn't hurt to add a curl to the hair maybe? make it a tiny bit more wavy? Something? a crumb i beg of thee?

his symbolism is all over the god damn place, native american monsters (you know the one), voodoo, radio, puppets, stitches, circuses??? and Tentacles i guess. two of those are from closed religions so if you dumped those you would actually get a more concise character focused on the concept of vox populi as a means of societal control and influence as we see in his first song. but again that gets drowned out repeatedly by all the other random toy box bits shoved into him.

tumblr sexy man bait

he serves no purpose in the story. he does spooky stuff, pretends to do things and then goes back to sitting around looking spooky. i understand that his motif is supposed to be aloof mastermind but maybe have him do more mastermindy things? if you remove most of alastors scenes, bar the songs, it doesn't change all to much. husk and nifity can still be at the hotel, they could be looking for outs in their contracts the same as angel dust. hell it even helps with the one scene where he dose some spooky shit, asking charlie for a favor in exchange for his help in the fight with the angels instead of asking him about angel weapons which should have remained a strictly vaggie scene.

his presence in a way delegitimize the story, as I noted in in the section regarding redemption, the three parts are "what is the crime, do they want to change, what is stopping them?" and alastor kinda just spits in the face of that. he is a serial killer cannibal that has no qualms about how evil he is and apparently must continue being evil due to being under the control under someone legitimately called the Root Of All Evil. show him take a slight interest in the idea that maybe shit for him could be better, make him Want Change at the bare fucking minimum or dont have him at the hotel.

his stupid little fucking horns, big shot the troll liker wants characters to have big fucking horns, make them noticeable or dont have them.

he looks more like a dog boy, which could have been an interesting thing with the collar motif but fuck me i guess.

personal pet peeve but i fucking hate characters that have a million plus powers, stick to a set number, be creative.

im getting more petty as i go on so last point: he could have been in less episodes, he didn't need to be in dad beat dad, that should have been just a lucifer and charlie episode. inverse the red and black and i think he would be fucking great color wise, his body type is the same as ten different characters, he isnt radio enough, aside from the voice and and staff if you told me he was the fucking Cat Demon i would have been just as convinced.

16. Angel Dust

what the fuck, gay spider? its hard to actully articulate all the thoughts i have on angel dust, not in the sense that he is a deeply thought provoking character but in the fact that there is not much meat on the bones.

all around i think angel dust is kinda middling. he has a decent enough romance with husk, he has a decent enough story line that revolves around battling addiction and removing yourself from an abuser (which the story tries to brand as "Redemption???")

I dont like that most of his jokes would qualify as sexual harassment, i don't mind him being sexual as a character but continuing on when clearly someone doesn't like the jokes hurts the character.

not a critique but he is pink, which honestly ill fucking take at point, as long as its not more fucking red.

i think his design is an improvement over some of the old vivzie designs but it feels like it could have done with going a few more rounds of design changes.

same thing with alastor, charlie and vaggie, there is not enough of the animal that they are supposed to be. You could have told me angel dust was a fucking bee or something and i would have had to believe you. nothing about angel dust initially says spider, hell he dosent even have enough limps to be a fucking spider.

17. Carmilla carmine

are... are you supposed to be a rabbit...?

Big Yoai Hands

ballet fighting style, could have been cool, wish she fought more like sanji or chun li.

A single mom that works to hard, who loves her kids and never stops-

her song was decent, not great, decent. it feels as though the actress has experience singing but not in the way they tried to make her sing during her two songs. they have a obvious mexican influence, honestly just let her sing in spanish in the english dub. go listen to the spanish dub, "out for love" sounds great in spanish.

i wish i had more thoughts on them, fucking rip.

18. cherri bomb

that's not a punk aesthetic that's 2010s alt

decent character, they showed up once or twice i guess, no real thoughts.

19. egg boiz

absolutely perfect, i have not notes on them, these are perfect creatures.

20. Emily

im so fucking happy to see a singular blue character

does the naive dreamer bit better then charlie

We really shouldnt have seen her until the end of season two or middle of three.

good contrast with the other angels on screen.

Wait she is supposed to be black??? Where???

21. Husk

keith david you absolute delight, Why on gods green earth did they only give you one singing part?

one of the few charecters where its clear husk is a cat, i do like the kinda... marquee design, he is a magic cat, thats neat. i still think you can toss the wings and eyebrows and still have just as good of a charecter.

has a deeply intresting story of someone who died as a nobody, became the fat cat of hell and then was forced back to the bottom by their own vices, not used at fucking all.

huge potential, little pay off.

22. lillith

I know nothing about her except she ditched her kid and husband to vacation in heaven and i think thats kinda funny.

alot of werid things floating around her, again she shouldnt have been shown in the show at all until next season.

23. lucifer morningstar

no notes, funniest charecter, did a song based on friend like me.

few notes: i do like the idea that the immortal symbol of pride is a constant emotional wreckage constantly seeking approval through grand showmanship and manic energy that threatens to take over anything they touch.

would have liked more snake stuff on him, maybe some more goat things like horns.

that is such a stupid fucking staff lmao.

24. Adam.

alex brightman you absolute fucking delight, you should have had more songs.

I wish his design was more focused on the idea of him being a glam rock wash up

I fucking hate his mask

We shouldn't have met him until the end of the season.

25. Niffty

again she is supposed to be a bug or cockroach but nothing about her points to that.

token straight

keeps rocketing back and fourth between sexulization and infantilization

you had kimiko glenn but didnt give her a single fucking song?

26. Sir Pentious

the secret season one redeemed.

the pilot version of him felt more like someone that could do a season one redemption arc, a megalomaniac constantly attempting territory grabs, there is something you can work with, actual character flaws to work through.

essentially a child after the first episode.

actually a snake which i appreciate.

no where near steampunky enough.

27. the villians of the show dont make much sense, each one feels like they should be season long deals on their own instead of a bunch of team rocket esque idiots that show up on occasion, do a bad thing and then leave.

28. Valentino

gOD THERE IS SO MUCH RED

only a moth some of the time.

sucks as a villain, maybe they need more screen time to show why they suck in a more substantial way aside from being told that he sucks.

it is interesting that angel dust is only under his magical control when in the studio, it shows that angel dust has to make a conscious choice to return, which in turn can be made to show how abusers can draw back their victims. I do not think it was done well in this circumstance as it shows him to be cartoonishly evil, constantly flying back and fourth between sweet and utter psycho, there is no actual reason for angel dust to ever actually go back to the studio, he just does so every so often.

29. Vox

legit who cares? the only thing about him that is in any way substantial is all the dope ass fan art we get.

propaganda machine angle that is not explored at all, just hinted at. no actual barring on the story whatsoever.

why didn't he try to do the same shit as alastor by the way? he knows its bad if alastor gets in good with charlie so shouldn't it be a ass kissing race?

same body shape as literally every other male character.

tumblr sexy man version of pyrocynicals fursona.

30. Valvette

the actual poster child of the shows huge problem of "Show me, don't tell me".

apparently the glue that holds the villains together. never shown.

apparently the one that makes the love potions that valentino is famous for. had to learn about that in the fuckin wiki trivias

we know so much about her from things outside of the show.

was there to call carmilla a coward, that's her plot contribution. she shows up every now and again but its never anything substantial and serves to more around take up run time for people We Don't Need To Know Yet.

im not trying to be mean, animation is animation, we need smaller studios to have success in the industry so that other indie studios can have that success, felling a tree makes it easier for others to follow. showing that its possible to number brain rot exacs helps all animators.

but this show has so much bullshit attached to it, it has so much fucking potential that it fries my brain with unyielding frustration.

this took a bit to write, im tired, thanks for reading.

[yourdandelionofthedeathknell]

The Theraprism: Good or bad?

Ya know, i've never been sure how to feel on the Theraprism, as shown in the Book of Bill. This is in large part because we get very little info on it, from any perspective other then BIll's own at least (and he is...Not a reliable narrator). Personally, I see three possible interpretations and I don't know which one is correct. To be clear, I think all of these are fairly valid: 1. Their methods seem insipid, but are actually quite effective. They seem to have been effective in the past (one of Bill's fellow patients is slated for release in the near-future apparently), and the Axolotl (who, while not exactly rich characterization himself, has, generally, been portrayed as wise and benevolent) referred to it as "what [Bill] needs the most", which would be weird if it doesn't have SOME merit. I, myself, honestly prefer this one, because I think it works better with the narrative of the Book of Bill (a book which, generally, does not encourage the reader to sympathize with Bill's plight. Pity, maybe, but the framing is very clearly that he kinda deserves this) and the schadenfreude the reader is encouraged to feel if Bill's hellish afterlife is, largely if not entirely, a self-inflicted one: That it wouldn't be particularly bad if not for his own combo of being unable to accept that he lost, that he shouldn't be allowed to do whatever he wants whenever he wants to anyone he wants, inability to form meaningful bonds with others, and, most of all, his total inability to admit to being wrong. He COULD leave at any time, if he would just actually repent, but...He's Bill, so...He won't. It just works best for me if his hell is largely self-inflicted. 2. They are harmful, possibly deliberately. This does have a fair bit of support textually. Mandatory therapy is already a pretty major ethical grey area at best (a major tenant of modern psychotherapy is that you can't make someone change unless they take the first step), they definitely engage in toxic positivity, and, of course, the "Solitary Wellness Void" is...Solitary confinement, which is a practice most modern medical institutions oppose and consider to be psychological torture. So, fair bit of support for this. 3. This is what I think was probably Alex's intent: They're a bunch of oblivious obnoxiously happy morons (as Bill himself would probably describe them) whose attempts to treat eons-old eldritch horror bad guys with puppet shows and arts and crafts is meant to be amusingly-inept rather then actively malicious, and whose effectiveness (such as it is) is down to having literally eternity to try. Kinda like what Mabel might do to rehabilitate someone. To use an analogy, think Charlie Morningstar from Hazbin, at least in the first couple episodes, where the fact that she's treating adult criminals like misbehaving children is the joke and is meant to indicate incompetence rather than malice. I get that isn't that much different from the proceeding (except in terms of "how seriously are we supposed to take this"), but still. I think all three of these have support, and, to be clear, I go with the first one not because I think it's the most supported (might be the least), but because it jives most with how I think about BIll's narrative IE as a character we're meant to, at best, pity, but not really sympathize with. I think the intent is "Bill is suffering a karmic self-inflicted punishment after all the pain and suffering he's caused", not "Bill is being medically abused and we should feel bad for him". The Book of Bill does invite readers to sympathize with Bill occasionally, but mostly past Bill, not current Bill. All viewpoints are valid, this is just trying to organized some thoughts on the subject. I sincerely hope I haven't said anything harmful here. Uh, cards on the table, I am neurodivergent, but i've never had therapy, forcefully or otherwise (although I did have an irrational fear of the possibility of institutionalization for a bit), so i'm sorta going off vibes here, sorry to say. If I said anything insensitive here, I apologize.

[untitledgoosegay]

re last reblog I do see fanfic culture pushing/replicating a certain model of "what trauma looks like," "how trauma works"

this is a problem across all areas of society obviously, but transformative works are, well, transformative. they're about crafting and modifying narratives where the fan-creator sees a flaw or a lack -- often for the better! don't get me wrong, I've done my fair share of "I take a hammer and I fix the canon," it's the main thing that gets my creative gears spinning -- but what happens when that "flaw" is simply a narrative not conforming to popular expectations?

some people just don't get PTSD from events that sound obviously traumatic. they're not masking, and they're not coping; they just straight-up didn't get the permanently-locked stress-response that defines PTSD. they walk away from a horrible experience going "well, that sucked, but it's over now." some people do get PTSD from events most people wouldn't find traumatic. we don't really know why some people get PTSD and others don't. but fandom has an idea of events that must be traumatizing, of a "correct" way to portray trauma. you see the problems with this lack of understanding in e.g. fans pressuring the devs of Baldur's Gate 3 to add dialogue where the player character badgers Halsin about his own feelings on his abuse -- because he must be traumatized, and his trauma must fit a certain mold and presentation of sexual trauma, under the mistaken impression that anything outside that narrow window is somehow "wrong" and disrespectful or even harmful to survivors.

take, for another example, the very common trope of a traumatized character who hates touch or sex "learning" to like touch or sex as a part of their healing process. certainly that can be healing for some people; other people will never like, or want, touch or sex, because of trauma or because they just don't. the assumption that someone who doesn't want sex or doesn't like to be touched must be traumatized, must be suffering from this perceived lack, is seriously harmful -- to asexual people, to people with sensory issues around touch, and to people for whom healing from trauma means freedom to refuse sex or touch.

and there's a secondary trope, one that's slightly more thoughtful but ultimately repeats the problem -- that once someone has learned that their boundaries will be respected, they'll feel it's safe to soften those boundaries. once they feel safe refusing touch or sex, they'll feel comfortable allowing it on their own terms. but many people don't, and many people won't! many people will simply never want to be touched, and never want sex, and they are not suffering or broken or lacking because of it. the idea that proving you'll respect someone's boundaries entitles you to test those boundaries -- the paradox is obvious, and yet this is something i've seen hurt (re-traumatize) people i care for.

people are imperfect victims. people don't heal in the ways you expect. many people have positive memories of their abuse, of their abusers. many people hurt others in the course of their trauma, in ways that can't easily be unpacked in a 5k oneshot. very few narratives of trauma and recovery actually fit the ones put forward by popular children's media and romance novels -- which are the ones I most see replicated in fandom spaces, because they provide the clearest narrative and easiest catharsis, and so they're easy and soothing to reach for.

that's not necessarily a bad thing! i am not immune to goopy romance tropes. i am not immune to teary catharsis. not every fic has to grapple with ugly realities. but there's a problem when these narratives become predominant, when people think they're accurate and realistic depictions of trauma, when the truth of trauma is unpleasant and uncomfortable, and doesn't fit any single narrative, let alone one of comforting catharsis