#one of the characters is revealed to have an incestuous relationship as well

[proship-cafe]

periodical (and deeply funny) reminder that, technically, all hmstck ships are incest

[thewriteadviceforwriters]

Crafting Compelling Morally Gray Characters: A Guide for Fiction Writers

In literature, there is often a clear distinction between good and evil. Heroes are portrayed as virtuous and villains as wicked. However, in recent years, there has been a rise in the popularity of morally gray characters - those who do not fit neatly into the categories of good or evil. These characters are complex, flawed, and often make decisions that challenge the reader's moral compass. In this guide, I'll help you explore the art of crafting compelling morally gray characters and how to make them stand out in your fiction writing.

What Are Morally Gray Characters?

Morally gray characters, also known as morally ambiguous characters, are those who do not conform to traditional notions of good or evil. They may have both positive and negative traits, and their actions may be motivated by a mix of good and bad intentions. These characters often blur the lines between right and wrong, making them more relatable and intriguing to readers.

Examples of Morally Gray Characters

Some well-known examples of morally gray characters include:

Severus Snape from the Harry Potter series: Initially portrayed as a villain, Snape's true motivations and actions are revealed to be more complex and morally ambiguous.

Jaime Lannister from A Song of Ice and Fire series: Known for his arrogance and incestuous relationship with his sister, Jaime's character evolves throughout the series, showcasing his internal struggle between his duty and his personal desires.

Walter White from Breaking Bad: A high school chemistry teacher turned methamphetamine producer, Walter's character is constantly torn between his desire for power and his moral compass.

Why Are Morally Gray Characters Compelling?

Morally gray characters are compelling because they challenge the reader's perceptions of right and wrong. They are not easily categorized as heroes or villains, making them more relatable and human. These characters also add depth and complexity to a story, making it more interesting and thought-provoking.

The Power of Relatability

One of the main reasons morally gray characters are so compelling is because they are relatable. They are not perfect, and they make mistakes, just like real people. This makes them more human and allows readers to connect with them on a deeper level. When readers can see themselves in a character, it creates a stronger emotional connection to the story.

The Element of Surprise

Morally gray characters also add an element of surprise to a story. Their actions and decisions may not always align with what the reader expects, keeping them on the edge of their seat. This unpredictability makes the story more engaging and can lead to unexpected plot twists.

The Exploration of Morality

Morally gray characters also allow for a deeper exploration of morality in a story. By challenging traditional notions of good and evil, these characters force readers to question their own moral compass and consider the gray areas of morality. This can lead to thought-provoking discussions and a deeper understanding of complex moral issues.

How to Craft Morally Gray Characters

Crafting morally gray characters requires a delicate balance of positive and negative traits, as well as a deep understanding of their motivations and internal struggles. Here are some tips for creating compelling morally gray characters in your writing.

Give Them a Strong Motivation

Every character, regardless of their moral alignment, should have a strong motivation for their actions. For morally gray characters, this motivation should be complex and not easily defined as purely good or evil. It could be a desire for power, revenge, or even a sense of duty. This motivation will drive their decisions and actions throughout the story.

Show Their Flaws and Vulnerabilities

Morally gray characters are not perfect, and they should not be portrayed as such. They should have flaws and vulnerabilities that make them more relatable and human. These flaws could be physical, emotional, or moral, and they should play a role in the character's development and decisions.

Create Internal Conflict

One of the defining characteristics of morally gray characters is their internal conflict. They are torn between their good and bad tendencies, and this struggle should be evident in their thoughts and actions. This internal conflict adds depth to the character and makes them more relatable to readers.

Avoid Stereotypes

When crafting morally gray characters, it's important to avoid falling into stereotypes. These characters should not be one-dimensional or defined solely by their moral ambiguity. They should have unique personalities, backgrounds, and motivations that make them stand out as individuals.

Show Their Growth and Development

As with any well-written character, morally gray characters should experience growth and development throughout the story. They should learn from their mistakes and make decisions that challenge their moral compass. This growth and development will make them more dynamic and interesting to readers.

How to Make Morally Gray Characters Stand Out

With the rise in popularity of morally gray characters, it's important to make yours stand out in a sea of similar characters. Here are some tips for making your morally gray characters unique and memorable.

Give Them a Distinctive Voice

A character's voice is an essential part of their identity. It should be unique and reflective of their personality and motivations. For morally gray characters, their voice should reflect their internal conflict and the complexity of their moral alignment.

Create a Strong Backstory

A character's backstory can provide valuable insight into their motivations and actions. For morally gray characters, a strong backstory can help explain their moral ambiguity and add depth to their character. It can also create empathy and understanding for their decisions.

Use Foils to Highlight Their Morality

Foils are characters who contrast with the main character, highlighting their strengths and weaknesses. For morally gray characters, foils can be used to showcase their moral ambiguity and challenge their beliefs. This can add depth to the character and create interesting dynamics between them and other characters.

Morally gray characters add depth, complexity, and relatability to a story. By challenging traditional notions of good and evil, these characters force readers to question their own moral compass and consider the gray areas of morality.

[litcest]

Using the template made by @familyromantic. Spoilers bellow. And above I guess, sorry.

Under the Pendulum Sun by Jeannette Ng

The Coffin Path by Katherine Clements

Forbidden by Tabitha Suzuma

Wildacre by Phillipa Gregory. They don't get married but Beatrice's whole plan is to seduce her brother so she can control the family farm

Josie and Jack by Kelly Braffet. The canon incest is just a kiss, but I'm sure Jack wanted more than that. Very toxic pair of siblings, Jack is very manipulative and Josie... well, Josie kills him

Wasteland by Francesca Lia Block

Only by blood: I could not think of a book like this. I see sometimes the "not raised as family" argument being made after the reveal of accidental incest, but not before. I think there might be a historical romance that Anne and George Boleyn's romance is justified with this trope, as they were raised apart, but I can't recall for sure

Burying the Shadow by Storm Constantine, they characters are Eloim and have no problem with incestuous relationship. The book has a brother/sister canonical relationship, a very sustive brother/brother relationship and a father constantly hitting on his daughter, but the daughter has no interest as she thinks that becoming pregnant by him would destroy her body (as her father is known to be 'big' and produce giant children)

A Game of Thrones by George R. R. Martin. I'm obviously considering the Cersei/James relationship in here

Time travel incest: also couldn't think of any because, fun fact about me, I hate time travel stories, so of course I never read them. But I know there's one book with a guy who dates his grandma not knowing who she was

Into the Forest by Jean Hegland. Two sisters who cling together as civilization collapses. I think The Doloriad by Missouri Williams fits better, as in this one they do have sex for reproductive reasons, but I don't like the book, so I'm going with Into the Forest

Flowers in the Attic by V. C. Andrews. The children engage in incest but so had their parents (uncle/niece if you go by the original canon, brother/sister if you consider the later revelations to be canon). Cathy and Chris know their parents are uncle/niece, but only because their grandmother tells them, if it had been for Corrine, the truth would have always remained hidden

[chengfagshi]

I need antis to understand that glorification of taboos is actually very common in media, yet I see them mostly criticizing random people on tumblr for doing the same. Here are a few examples:

In the coffin of Andrew and Leyley, the arguably best ending of the game is the siblings end up sleeping together. They’re in a toxic co-dependent relationship

in Hannibal, the cannibalism is romanticized. It’s two characters eating people together and this is shown as romantic

in black butler, Ciel is engaged to his cousin. This incestous relationship is taken very seriously throughout the anime/manga

in Invincible, an immortal man falls in love with a 20 year old. She can’t be older than that and is even in the “teen team”. He was also devastated when she died, making this relationship anything but normal

in VC Andrew’s “flowers in the attic”, the main characters are siblings who fall in love together. Although their relationship is set up as a tragedy, they do end up staying together once they’re free from the confines of the attic. It is also revealed that they’re the product of an incestous relationship themselves

romanticizing these taboo things isn’t inherently a bad thing. Some people find comfort in knowing that the relationship is happy because they can relate or imagine “what if” scenarios. But antis don’t (want to) understand but will also never go against big media at the same time, mostly because of “rules for thee but not for me” but I also thibk it’s largely just an act, to save face in front of their “friends”

I agree with all your points. Also, for the first one, it's crazy to me. Because firstly, the incestuous relationship between Andrew and Ashley is optional. So you do not have to go that route. But the cannibalism and murder ISN'T optional. But for some reason, antis think these 20 year olds KILLING AND EATING ppl is better than an optional incest route. And just because something has incest in it, does not mean ppl condone it irl. There's so many horror films with torture porn in it. Does that mean the director wants people to be ripped apart in real life? No. Things are allowed to be explored in fiction because, well, it's fiction. Literally none of it matters. Morals do not exist when it comes to fictional settings. This is actually my favorite image to use every time an anti says the three magic words.

[carlyraejepsans]

You said in the Ralsei post that his flirting with Kris is supposed to make us uncomfortable or at least question his relationship to Asriel. I agree that Toby could possibly "go there", but do you think it's intentional on Ralsei's part? I genuinely don't think he knows he looks like Kris's brother. If someone makes Kris get into a relationship with someone who looks like their brother, I think it'll be the players fault for knowing he looks like Asriel and forcing it anyway rather than Ralsei himself actually knowingly being into incest. (feel free to answer this without posting the ask if it's worded badly)

all things considered i don't think he does. i think what's happening in deltarune is that ralsei, as a darkner, was created to play on our fondness and love for the asriel we knew in undertale. at the same time, if you're in any way familiar with classic rpgs, you'll realize that ralsei's role in the story is a direct callback to the "healer of the cast, bearer of the prophecy and love interest for the protagonist" trope (a role that was always given to female characters, tying into his gnc quoi), so being framed romantically by the story is... kind of a given here. however, those two core aspects of his, well, self, are basically incompatible. at least when it comes to his desire to be liked by kris, because being pushed into romantic situations you perceive as incestuous is, understandably, going to freak a guy out.

as you probably know, i recently had the chance to play earthbound, and paula reminded me of ralsei so much. ralsei deconstructs the rpg girl trope in general, but knowing how big of a mother 2 fan toby is, i feel like she was a pretty clear inspiration in the way he wrote ralsei. and something that happens again and again and again throughout the course of earthbound as soon as paula joins the team, is that people constantly make comments about her and ness being together. now, paula/ness is canon by the end of the game and has been confirmed as such by the creators, but earthbound as a game heavily features the topic of fatedness; and unlike deltarune, chosen ones and prophecies and dreams of future friends are never questioned by its plot, they are the plot. so, since a big part of deltarune's gimmick consists in questioning the trope of rpg fate, i wonder if ralsei's crush on kris might be revealed to be something predetermined too, going forward. after all, he spent a long time waiting for the heroes of prophecy to arrive so he could become their friend and help them on their quest. if that same "fate" determined that he was supposed to be kris' love interest, then knowing ralsei he probably accepted that fact and acted accordingly. which would mean getting into whether those feelings are actually genuine or if they're born out of duty and his submission to What Is Right And What Should Be.

the main reason i don't think he's aware, though, is that that incompatibility between those two aspects of himself that prevent him from fulfilling (part of) his purpose is a storyline that heavily reminds me of spamton's. ralsei is the most "purposepilled" character in the entire game. he is ADAMANT about reinforcing 1) his own lack of agency 2) that of all other darkners 3) the darkners' purpose towards the lighters as not only inescapable, but good, 4) the status quo of the light world/dark worlds dynamic as it stands. fulfilling his purpose is a BIG deal to him, and the story is obviously going to have an arc challenging it and sending the poor boy into an existential crisis. and him realizing during the events of the game that his literal appearence alone makes kris uncomfortable and prevents him from being the good rpg love interest character he was created to be, well... it just feels like a good way to further that arc.

[cafeleningrad]

If it's not to late for the ask game:💚💖💔 for Revolutionary girl Utena. (And if you want ofc)

This show is a never ending opportunity to talk about so the asks will be perfectly on time any time. Thank you a lot for the questions! (/≧▽≦)/ 💚 What does everyone else get wrong about your favorite character? That would Tokiko. The fandom barely talks about her, if they acknowledge their existence at all - which is in itself perfectly ironic for the Black Rose Arc finale. I've got many, so many thoughts on the limited yet incredibly revealing screen time of Tokiko, Nemuro before he became Mikage Souji, and the Chida Mamiya. But I will keep it brief at their actual, very human story being essential for explaining what psychological issues are determining the logic of Ohtori, and Akio as it's center of gravity. Tokiko appearing, and being the only person Akio can not intimidate or impress is my favourite moment about accepting past pain, and a life outside of Ohtori.

(And I guess for other two favourites Wakaba and Nanami, I think the fandom is pretty spot on about them (also high five to every Wakaba fan out her, love my onion girl 🧅🤎)) (And yeah, maybe some fans are a bit too kind on Saionji. This boy is physically mistreating others for his compensation. On the other hand, I'm a big Theon Greyjoy fan. For both characters the deeply complicated childhood friendship, patheticness-to-likeability-ratio, and gender-struggle make them overcomepnsate in the most dickhead ways parallels are just too close for me to overlook them....)

As usual, writing about this show got way too long, so the rest is under the cut. ;)

💖 What is your biggest unpopular opinion about the series? two things 1. This show thrives on accepting ambiguity and plurality all at once. The itself perfectly blends all it's aspects and inspirations together. Analysis of the text is a beautiful kaleidoscope. I do think a bit more of interest for the Japanese, especially the time and Japanese popculture context helps understanding why certain characters are the way they are could be useful. (By example: Juri's distant yet poised demeanour in a male environment reflect the tough position for women trying to survive in a male dominated field, or Nanami's and Kozue's incestuous tendencies corresponding to a prominent shoujo trope of the time, or what it means for Akio to take on his fiancée's last name, or Jur/iori's ashamed perception of lesbian love and desire as impure is combating questionable Class-S tropes). Still, I think different readings of gender, queerness, but also depression, maturity, childism, machismo in facism, Greek theater, colour theory, literary analysis of fairy tales, German literary influences, theater, power dynamics and also personal thoughts of escj viwer don't exclude other. Instead they link to each other, help understand one aspect a bit better, maybe are in conflict, or support each other. Even if I might not agree a 100% with every reading or interpretation, the thoughts of many other fans have helped me seeing different aspects in different lights.

2. Lesbianism didn't save anyone. I know most "gay gals winning"-claims are jokes. However it does irritate me a bit because the show works really hard against gender essentialism. It understands really well how love, and mature, good relationships works - even within same sex couples. There is a lot to untangle here but in order to not jump to 99 tangents at once: Princehood is not only misogyny. It's an entire mindset of egocentrism, and a power hierarchy needing over people to submit so a single person can climb on their backs. Such renders every relationship to a disproportionate exchange of values - not loving the actual person. At the pinnacle of it nothing matters more than an individual being uncritically revered, untouchable, unconditionally be loved without having to risk anything. If homsexuality was such an easy cure Touga, Saionji, Shiori and Juri... wouldn't be like that. They might even quit the show the moment Shiori said sorry, or Saionji returned at Ohtori. Them being all stuck in princehood mentality means seeing relationships as exhange of value, domination and submission as only possible form of intimacy, yet honest feelings and hurt are incredibly dangerous to reveal. They've a bleak outlook into the future, and mostly care about themselves before they actually care about the other. (Even though from all people Saionji might be the most caring for Touga... this boy is such a trainwreck...) This is why it takes Anthy and Utena 39 episodes and movie to flirt and finally kiss each other because they needed to mature and overcome the fears into which they were conditioned. Their vulnerability of loving has hurt them before: Anthy gave her all to Dios just to have her most intimate spheres in every sense getting violated. Utena lost the unconditional love of her parents, and her trust and intimacy got badly betrayed by Akio. However, they dare risk experiencing such pain again for the other. Opening up, daring to believe in something better, believing in the kindness and connection Ohtori so vehemently denies... there might be the chance of an miracle, actually.

(Don't get me wrong, it is a very queer show so it also tears down the pitfalls of heteronormativity. A prince needs a princess to showcase prowess and simultaneously own someone they can rob of power, relationships are just functions. Unlearning patriarchy means learning anew what personhood and what love is. Love is also the preservation and respect for the personhood of another person. i.e. it's basically Erich Fromm but without his fraud understanding of gender...) Again, SKU is incomplete with only one partial reading.

I don't mean it as "love that transcends gender", and "it doesn't need a label" way. No, Anthy is suffering under very real abuse whereas also bearing a heavily symbolic if not allegorical role. Meaning, reconciling with Anthy, Utena does reconcile with her struggles about being a woman. Utena is by design queer as it already is her starting point that whatever is considered "normal" not making intrinsic sense to her.

💔 If you had to remove one major character from the series, who would you choose? Ooof that's a tough one. The entire cast represent different arguments and issues of the Ohtori system, even side characters like Keiko and Tsuwabuki become relevant. Let alone main characters... (And I'm of the very strong opinion that a good story utilizes every character perfectly. Without even a terrible character there would be no plot. Which is to say we have to keep Akio if we want a plot... ) Even when dead, Touga is a necessary foil as self-aware ideal of princehood... I know Nanami only appears once in the manga but what would the story be without one of the best characters ever created for TV?

Alright, I've to choose: Evne though Miki and Kozue are my Rosetta stones to Akio's and Anthy's fraud relationship, I think removing Kozue would make for an experiment in deciphering Miki. How quickly would we pick on his deal if her was a prince without princess. After all, Juri and Shiori are the next step in isolation and dehumanisation, and Saionji has actually as many princesses as Wakaba has princes... hmmm... To say, Kozue is my starting point in understanding the arbitrary of gender roles and misleading concepts of innocence. Without her Miki could mislead the audience much more easily...

[goodqueenaly]

Sorry, I´m trying to rephrase it. I get the idea that Jaime will go back to KL to kill Cersei after she wins her trial. But even such an extremely emotional character might see that her losing would mean the life of his beloved children. So I thought that it´s them dying despite it all (and in Tommen´s case probably because of Cersei´s actions) that will really drive him over the edge.

I don't think the question of the trial's outcome as it might affect his children will really come into Jaime's head. Indeed, Jaime has almost to some extent separated in his mind Cersei and their children with respect to her trial; while he freely admitted to himself in ADWD that he could not save Cersei because she was "guilty of every treason laid against her", he did not seem to extend that conclusion to their children - namely, that if Cersei were guilty of treason in having extramarital (and incestuously conceived) children, those children would at best be considered bastards with no right to the throne, and at worst murdered as abominations in the eyes of the Faith. Instead, Jaime was still thinking of himself as free to return to the capital in his ADWD chapter and planning on revealing Myrcella's true paternity to her, and had as of the end of AFFC been considering how to reorganize young Tommen's royal government. In other words, I don't believe Jaime will think "oh well Cersei had to say she was not guilty because our kids were at stake" or that he will move past the results of the trial for the sake of their kids; rather, I think for Jaime, the trial is squarely and solely about Cersei, with the question of their children a separate and entirely personal matter.

That is not to say that Tommen's and Myrcella's deaths - and unfortunately, they are prophetically doomed to die (however specifically that happens), and likely sooner than later - could not have any impact on Jaime, of course; however, I do not feel confident on the timeline of their deaths relative to his return and his decision to kill Cersei. In any event, though, I think what will motivate his return to the capital is the outcome of the trial as it relates to what Jaime has already been brooding on with Cersei. Having confessed to the High Septon that she had had sex with both Lancel and the Kettleblack brothers (notably all three, even though in actuality she likely only had sex with one of them), Cersei will, by emerging victorious in her trial, "prove" that she never had sex with Jaime - both an open confirmation to the world of Tyrion's spiteful revelation to Jaime at the end of ASOS, which has so bothered him since, and a public denial of the romantic-sexual relationship that had defined his and Cersei's lives for more than two decades. If "innocence" was what Jaime had wryly answered Hildy when she asked what he liked most in a woman, here was the exact opposite - a woman legally considered innocent by virtue of success in a trial by combat, yet one whom Jaime knows more than anyone else to be guilty (strictly in the sense of having done what she denied doing). Given his long-simmering resentment, bitterness, and violent thoughts toward Cersei in AFFC and ADWD, I think Jaime's motivation is to confront Cersei about what he might see as the ultimate betrayal of their relationship, and ultimately to decide to kill her in that confrontation.

[regarding-stories]

Hard to pull: Good Ret-Cons

Ah. The Ret-Con, Retroactive Continuity. At its best, a satisfying twist that recontextualizes everything. At its worst, a stupid rug pull.

When we think about it, it's often meant to introduce something that wasn't established before. But it's hard to distinguish from a late plot twist at times, because so often these go hand in hand.

Let's look at one of the most famous examples: Darth Vader is Luke's father. (Duh duh dunn! Kidding.)

As far as I know, this turn of events wasn't planned for when giving us "Star Wars: A New Hope". But it's ever-so-satisfying. Audiences in 1980 were apparently lapping it up, and there's the funny Simpsons scene where Homer spoils it for all those movie-goers standing in line back in the day. (Long lines for watching Star Wars being a thing back then.)

One of the key prerequisites for a good ret-con that it fits with established facts, mostly in not contradicting them. This is most often achieved by painting in a corner we haven't seen yet. But we know that this impactful plot twist came with a price, because it seems to contradict things Obiwan had been talking about so far.

This got resolved by Obiwan giving the somewhat unconvincing speech about "from a certain point of view." We learn that Obiwan has been hiding things from Luke which gives new nuance to their formerly perfect student-teacher relationship.

And apparently they liked ret-conning so much, they threw in Luke and Leia being siblings next - also impactful, but that makes their budding romance in the first installment, well, weird, retroactively potentially incestuous.

That's the recontextualization at full force. When we see those scenes with the kiss for good luck or Leia using Luke to get back at Han, they seem different to us, with us knowing something that the characters didn't know back then - nor the actors, since it hadn't been established.

Ret-cons work backwards in time, after all. They change the past and make us see it in a new light.

Fallout 2

Now, this might be a spoiler for some, but this game got released in 1998, so I guess we cleared the statute of limitations.

In Fallout 1, we learn that people hid in vaults to survive the nuclear holocaust. We also learn about the problems they had. Quite a few in fact, the broken water purification chip with no spare part being one thing.

In Fallout 2 it is "revealed" to us that for the most part, the vaults were experiments, and we get a lot more weirdness thrown at us. It's impactful because by this point we've seen a fair share of vaults, we think we know what they are for, and now the rug is pulled underneath us.

Here we see it again - if you manage to fit in with previous facts as well as you can, you can use a ret-con to make an impactful plot twist. This is put to good use in Fallout 2 to paint the picture of a Deep State government in league with Vault-Tec and Poseidon to do whatever they want, with zero concern for the population itself.

If you play Fallout 1 after 2 the whole story seems to basically fit into this new mold, that's how good it was in terms of ret-conning.

But ret-cons are dangerous and tempting, and they keep breeding more ret-cons. The Fallout 2 ret-con already put in question how humanity did survive. Was it stroke of luck? Being so resilient? And since the baddies were confined to an oil rig, how would they have remade the world in the first place? Part of this is covered by the Garden of Eden Creation Kit (G.E.C.K.). So now there's a magical means (come on, it's a suitcase-sized chemistry kit) to make a limited nice-to-live area.

But the seeds of sequel ret-conning were sown. Of course you need sequels to ret-con, else it's just a plot twist.

The Why of Ret-Cons

Lore, backstory, ret-cons... they typically serve one thing. You want to move the pieces into place to tell yet another story. Ret-cons are needed where you encounter problems with either established facts ("We need this to be somewhat different to work") or you want to establish new facts (better, but leads to "Why did nobody know or mention this?"). So you either change established facts or you add to them. The latter is typically more convincing and better-received.

If you change facts you need audience buy-in. What you're doing gives the audience something that makes it worth it, because you're changing something about how the world works. So you're effectively taking something away from the audience, or at least that part of the audience that cares about consistency and world-building.

In both cases, there's a question of pay-off - which is also true for plot twists. I mean, it's okay to make us gasp and give us a temporary emotional high. But ideally the ret-cons and/or plot twists give us something in the story from that point onward as well. Don't just yank us around, give us developments based on plot twists.

The new facts about Darth Vader, Luke, and Leia gives us new dramatic developments and conflict. Conflict with Han. Darth Vader provoking Luke into an angry outburst. This is the real payoff - this return to a consistent narrative unfolding from this point forward.

It's not just about undermining expectations or changing facts. If that was satisfying by itself, "The Last Jedi" (Episode VIII) would be more well-received and not considered the hot piece of garbage it is. It constantly destroys setups from Episode VII, quite intentionally, and it constantly throws plot twists at us. I was watching it on two separate long distance flights. It took me that long because every five minutes I went "This can't get worse!" and then it did. And I switched it off a few times.

Some people like that. I don't. It was really painful to watch, this lack of continuity. Continuity is a rewarding thing, so are setup-and-payoff relationships. There is a cost to pay with ret-cons, and your ret-con has to pay it - it has to better than continuity. It has to result in a better story. I think Star Wars succeeded here - by which I mean the original trilogy.

The Sequel Problem

Establishing new facts in sequels is best done honoring continuity. As I said, you best paint in corners where you don't touch the original, or follow developments implied in the original (but not played out). This often means new characters (like a change of management), new locales, new challenges.

All of this ideally abides by continuity. Ret-cons happen when you can't make your new facts mesh with the old facts - changing the past. This can be jarring. But as I said, if you manage to cast a new light on old facts, like the above examples, which qualify as plot twists (or, in case of Fallout, "lore twists"), this is usually received much better.

Tolkien did one of the former kind, though.

"The Hobbit", as far as I know, grew from a series of stories told to his kids when they were young. It's effectively a children's tale, and it has this feel of going in installments to this day when you read it.

When writing "The Lord of the Rings", Tolkien based not only a whole world-spanning conflict on that innocuous magical ring, he also reused Gollum as a major character into the whole thing. Gollum is woven into the story at several times, including his capture by the dark forces.

In order to make this work, Tolkien revised "The Hobbit". The version you might know is probably the revised edition, with a Gollum that meshes with the "Lord of the Rings" books. But the Gollum scene was rewritten, and other things adjusted to mesh with the world-building of those books to begin with.

So in order to pull of his major work, Tolkien revised his earlier work. This is a plain ret-con that changes things. To readers of "The Hobbit" it's also a sequel plot twist - "Wait, that magical ring is that important??" You wouldn't know from "The Hobbit" alone, after all.

In spite of changing facts, this change has been very well received, because the payoff is so huge. Yes, this might change what earlier readers had in their heads when reading the book. But "The Lord of the Rings" is so good, so enthralling, so captivating, it seems like people didn't mind. It's one of the series of books that created an entire genre and had enormous impact on authors and story-telling after, and also gaming.

Yes, Tolkien had to tamper with "the facts." But it's still considered worth it, so it's a ret-con with the stamp of approval from history.

A Straight-Forward Example Of What Not To Do

The longer you wait to change a fact, the more resistance from your audience you will meet. You're basically upsetting the foundation built over years or decades.

Nothing made this more apparent than "Doctor Who".

"Doctor Who" has been on screens since the 1960s (though with a considerable gap, mostly in the 90s). So fitting things into the continuity of a show based on time travel is always a challenge, especially since nobody planned forward for this.

Hell, they didn't even keep the original tapes. (Well done, BBC...)

So anytime you fit something in there, something else might break. Luckily enough, Whovians are tolerant of this kind. A lot of "Doctor Who" episodes don't really have a lot of continuity within the episode and resolve by "plot magic," after all. (Or so it felt to me, binging them.)

And while changes to the character in its many reincarnations have been controversial - like the 6th Doctor being such a dick during his run (redeemed later) or how the 11th Doctor became almost the center of the Universe, basically - there were things you didn't mess with.

Until the 13th Doctor.

It's one thing if you need to cram more reincarnations in to make the series continue in spite of "established fact." (This life extension happening during the tenure of the show-runner for the 11th and 12th doctors.) It's a whole another thing when you completely uproot the character's backstory.

Until the 13th Doctor it has always been clear that the story starts with the 1st Doctor. This is how the character remembers itself. This is what we saw on the screen (if we had access to the first episodes). Already ret-cons took place to establish some other behind-the-scenes facts (thanks, 11th Doctor and Clara, the Impossible Girl). But every Who writer left this fact intact.

Not the showrunner and writers of the 13th Doctor. They weren't satisfied with hollowing out the character until it was barely recognizable (see a really long but good explanation here). They wanted it to be impactful, they wanted major plot twists, and they certainly had a tendency to be unpleasantly preachy instead of entertaining or consistent.

So they established a Doctor before the Doctor, and this Doctor had been not a Time Lord, but a very powerful being that was horribly mistreated as child (actually tortured and experimented on) and from whom the power of reincarnation was stolen for the Time Lords.

I do hope that the main backlash for this lore change was not the fact that she was a woman of color. I really do. But frankly, "Doctor Who" had already been taking a nosedive in terms of writing, popularity was waning, the 13th Doctor herselfy already had been a poorly written, arrogant, judgemental character. And then they went to change one of the core facts of the setting after more than 50 years.

Fans were apparently not convinced that the payoff of all this was worth the destruction in terms of lore. The show lost viewers over time and against previous precedent, the showrunner didn't get to do another reincarnation of the Doctor. In a huge attempt of fan service, the original showrunner and David Tennant (technically, the 10th and most popular Doctor of the new run) were brought back to salvage this flagship show. (Not that the BBC always treated it like one.)

There was a sort of one-upman-ship going on here, you could say. Already under the Moffat era (the showrunner of the 11th and 12th Doctors), ret-cons and plot twists were way too common and used to invest us into a particular plot arc or season. But this one was too much, too far, and clashing with a central established fact of the Who-verse. Because people love their continuity of Doctors.

When Moffat inserted Clara Oswin everywhere into the time stream, he still paid homage to keeping this lineage intact, at best adding an unseen bit. But when you drop a setting-altering bomb that changes one of the facts that most fans care about after decades, you better be prepared to blow up in your face instead.

Frankly, I had high hopes for the 13th Doctor. A woman doctor seemed exciting. The flood of bad writing and plots and controversy that followed does not invalidate the idea, but it did burn it quite a bit.

Kinda convincing, kinda flat

Add too many ret-cons, and original ideas get undermined or become flat or unconvincing. Let's revisit the Fallout Universe, but let's look back at the Fallout TV Series.

In Fallout 1, the vaults were the means for humanity to survive. Playing that game you got the strong impression that everyone in there hailed from a Vault that opened at some point.

Fallout 2 already undermined this idea by the ret-con we mentioned above. The reasons why the Vaults were plagued with so many problems wasn't incompetence but malice and intent - the people in them were often used as lab rats, a fact that has been used for humor and weirdness in every Fallout game since.

Now, this setting "fact" was never that convincing. At least for the direct nuclear attacks, no power in the world can destroy every town, village, etc, especially in countries with huge surface area like, let's say the US, Canada, China, or Russia. (Though the fate of everything but the US has never been a real concerns of Fallout canon.) This is by the way especially true of China where huge swathes of the population are located in areas separate from each other by mountains and hills of all sizes.

I'm unclear on what the origin of most of the survivors in the later games was, but since we're already more than two centuries into the future, it tends to come up less and less. Also, due to the sheer size of the games in the 3D era you're not likely to keep track of lore the same. Fallout 1 and 2 were more focused experiences with good chances you saw most anything in it.

So, when the TV series "revealed" that most "plain folk" resented the Vault Dwellers because they were the rich folks sealed away while they descend from the outside, I balked. But I also looked it up, and yeah, it makes kind of sense. Most would be the descendants of humans that, by whatever means, survived fallout and nuclear winter with even less to go with than a Vault that experimented on you. Also, from the intro of the first game it was clear you had to pay for the privilege of being allowed into a Vault.

So, this actually works so far.

But this is just the tip of the ret-con iceberg taking place here, the writers moving one piece into place for the show's central reveal.

It was Vault-Tec all along. They sabotaged peace talks, they even wanted the bombs to fall, to make over society in their image. Instead of being a company relying on fear-mongering to extract money, they wanted to perpetuate themselves as the new humanity. Lip service was paid to the whole experiment idea by inciting the other companies to come on board and allowing them to do whatever they want. They also sabotaged clean, perpetual energy that would have ended the Resource Wars.

You could say, as a ret-con, that this kinda works. It adds facts. It adds a secret framework of privileged Vaults for the upper crust to survive as is. The ultimate dream of all villains: I, unchanged, in a world that completely is mine to shape. (Muahahaha.)

It doesn't necessarily contradict established facts. Vault-Tec was already part of the Deep State and a horribly corrupt company that didn't care about "the people." Vaults were already a privilege, experiments, and at times, a trap. And one sequel ret-con begets another. Fallout 4 already introduced working cryo technology.

But is it convincing?

Yes, the series has a message critical of capitalism, but it styles capitalism in a heavy-handed way, money being the root of all evils. You could argue this is the case, certainly, but it's the manner of delivery. Capitalism in the Fallout TV series is a cartoon villain, a cardboard cut-out.

The contradictions start to pile up, too. Vault 33 (where Lucy starts) is hidden so badly, it should have been raided by the Master (villain of Fallout 1) long ago. All the locations are right where the first game happened. This thing is nigh-impossible to miss. Then, for two centuries, everybody missed the existence of master Vaults that monitored the other Vaults - in a Universe that relies on a much more analog, visible technology than ours (partially to withstand the EMP effect of the blasts).

In fact, all of it hinges on the conspiracy being practically perfect until the point in time it is revealed. But when Norm enters Vault 31, he finds an incompetent Robobrain ... I mean Roomba-Brain (a former vice president) in charge. The whole plan seems to be full of holes and the usual Fallout Universe incompetence (corporations were always portrayed as hotbeds of graft, laziness, and maliciousness) is immediately restored. So, falls apart in minutes, was secret for more than 200 years...? (Also, Coop uncovered the conspiracy easily two centuries before.)

Depending on how you liked the series (I did not), you can be on the fence about this, definitely, or ignore it even for the most part. It kind of works, you know...? But it also flattens everything into one big bad, making it more cartoon-ish, more one-sided. The nigh-perfect conspiracy. The plot (and lore) holes. And again, how late the ret-con comes in the series.

The TV series is generally not afraid of establishing new facts (yet another Brotherhood of Steel chapter in yet another sequel popping out of the woodwork) or just changing the lore for dramatic impact (the fall of Shady Sands). Moving the pieces into place wasn't subtle, it literally comes with the force of yet another nuke.

It's this bulldozering of the lore I dislike the most. Fallout's big bads from the past kept getting more and more unconvincing as time moved on. Fallout 2 already established a Deep State hiding behind the whole Vault business - the Enclave. In "Fallout: New Vegas" Mr House (presented as sentient computer version of himself) was at least only one faction influencing that world, not a central big bad. In Fallout 4, the Institute perpetuated itself in secret for 200 years. And now Vault-Tec was the big bad all along.

It gets stale and flatter each time it is rehashed. And it effectively flattened the lore progression we see from Fallout 1 to Fallout 2 to Fallout: New Vegas. In that strand of continuity, the world expanded, went from tiny "points of light" to city states and proto-nations to warring nations. This was the potential future of the Fallout setting, a gradual emerging of a new, sometimes familiar, sometimes alien world. A different world influenced by the past but setting out to shape its own future.

But the writing of the TV series, while fulfilling the technical aspects of a ret-con, just drags all of this down because it's oh-so-dramatic. That's why I would argue on the side of it not being a good ret-con, though somewhat decently execute, but a cheap one. Your mileage may absolutely vary.

Less Sequels Please

In the end, continuity and ret-cons are issues most sequels have to tackle in some shape and form, and the popularity of plot twists and sudden reveals doesn't improve the situation. But at this point, ret-conning has been overdone and I could do with some continuity instead...

Or less damn sequels and more original works! Fallout 1 by itself is a weird masterpiece. We are apparently unwilling to let these go and create another, new one. For each good sequel there are quite a few bad, trying to minimize risk and smothering creativity. And in the end, often doing their fictional universes, if they "exist," no favor.

We looked at notable exceptions like "The Empire Strikes Back" but in general, I could do with some fresh ideas.

[aidansplaguewind]

I’m now agreeing with your point about Amanda. The scene between her and jimmy where she throws it in his face that she slept w his brother is just 😬. Like girl that is not the flex you think it is. Also Frank has an “ulcer.”Hopefully it’s nothing more than that but maybe that’s where they’re headed. What if he gets like cancer and sacrifices himself or something idk. Also waiting for the fucked up reveal that Mikey is Birdy’s incestuous son.

Yeah I've never liked how she treats Jimmy. I didn't like how she stepped on Frank's toes from the get-go cuz well, Aidan is my baby so I always back his characters. But it was more than just that with her.

I am by no means a woman who feels like a man should "wear the pants" in the family and that women shouldn't be opinionated or can't lead, but she just completely disregards his feelings altogether. And he's right, she does make decisions without asking him. I don't care if you're man or woman, if you're in a committed adult relationship, you consult your partner on most things, but especially the big things.

In the first season she had the audacity to want Michael to speak at Jamie's funeral but didn't seem interested at all in Jimmy speaking. Jimmy was the one who raised him. To Jamie, Jimmy was his father. That was so fucked up. I feel like she does rub her affair with Michael in Jimmy's face. Unfortunately I feel like Jimmy is about to make some bad choices just to level the playing field with Amanda, which I think is so fucking stupid for the writers to do. She's in the wrong but I have a feeling they're going to make him do something stupid so she comes out looking good.

Oh, and Frank's "ulcer"...yeah I still feel like they're setting up his death. Which, wtf, why bring him back just to kill him? Makes no damn sense. But right now his character is so irrelevant. He has no say anymore. He's living like a slob, going down hill mentally. I feel like that scene in tonight's episode was foreshadowing his death. And how his little body guard dude got onto him about saying he wished the bullet had hit Bren. He was like, "Don't ever say that out loud again Frank." It's possible they're telling us Bren's going to kill or have Frank killed. To be honest, if it weren't for Aidan I wouldn't even watch this show. It had potential but there's some major shit writing going on. They give us Frank, fake kill Frank, and I have a feeling they're going to kill him off for real without us ever getting to know Frank. It's such bullshit.

[my-current-obsession]

Tengoku Struggle: Strayside - Thoughts

I'm a bit late getting to this game, but I enjoyed it quite a bit! I definitely have some frustrations both minor and major, some of which I'll get into below, but overall it was a fun and engaging ride and one of few VNs where I can honestly say I like ALL the routes and romances - with the caveat that I have a bone to pick with one of them.

I think the premise of the story, the transient (amnesiac) daughter of the Lord of Hell being assigned to capture several escapees from Hell alongside four handpicked former prisoners (all of which are presumably heinous villains themselves), is very fun and creative. I was immediately drawn into the story and loved all the world-building relating to the Six Realms and Hell specifically.

It helps that in addition to the colorful main cast, the supporting cast in this game is fantastic. I particularly love Fujimori, King Enma, and Nono-sensei.

My play order was: Kiku -> Yona -> Sharaku -> JacK -> Goemon.

My thoughts and criticisms are down below. Beware spoilers if you haven't played/beaten the game yourself!

First off, while it's not necessarily a criticism, I do think it's an... interesting choice to clearly establish in the very beginning of the game that she knew and loved one specific love interest prior to her death, and then to further establish at the end of the common route that he remembers and loves her too. While I know most otome have a favored/intended canon route, pushing one guy this hard this early is kind of shooting itself in the foot, IMO. It's hard to really get into and love the other possible relationships when Rin is this obviously "meant" to be with Goemon and you're aware of it and imagining him quietly pining for her all while she gets cozy with another man. I can think of multiple other otomes which also have a similar conundrum, but at least in those cases you don't know about the history and connection with a specific love interest until actually doing his route, allowing you to fully enjoy all the other routes first.

But you could consider the early Goemon reveal more of a double-edged sword, because while it might dampen your enjoyment of the other romances, it would also encourage players to not give up early for any reason, wanting to make it to his route to get answers and resolution to what exactly his past with Rin is.

Kiku: I think his route was a good one to start with. Outside of his own backstory as well as his connected "villain", Azami, there are no major reveals here. There's also nothing I found particularly amazing OR frustrating. His route was solid, I liked it, but it didn't wow me either. His romance with Rin felt very light and fluffy. You could tell he was falling for her pretty fast and hard early in his route, and the two got along really well.

I also do really like Azami as a character and as the antagonist in this route, although if I have one complaint it's that the situation honestly could have been MORE dramatic and messy than it was. Maybe this is entirely on me for getting my hopes up, but I assumed there would be more to her backstory and behavior than there ended up being. I figured she was either gay, adding another layer to her general dislike of men and her immediate and enduring friendliness to Rin, OR... she might have secretly had incestuous feelings for her brother, further complicating THAT situation. Neither turned out to be true, which left me a tad disappointed. But I can't hold something that I created and wanted in my head against the story too much. Her backstory and behavior is perfectly understandable for what it is, I just wanted a bit more drama I guess.

Finally, I really like how Fujimori was incorporated into this route and I thought his budding friendship with Kiku was incredibly sweet.

Yona: I spent the first half of his route too frustrated to really enjoy it, to be honest. The story hammers home the idea that samurai are supposed to be honorable, yet Yona immediately fights dirty and nearly gets Rin killed as a result. And while the other guys (and Goemon in particular, which was a nice touch) were understandably furious at him, Rin herself WASN'T. If anything she blamed herself - the VICTIM - for letting things get out of hand.

What made matters worse is that while Yona IS overall a good, honorable guy, and he DOES actually have a good reason for his deep mistrust that led him to act out... we don't get it until literally the end of the route. We have to just sit back and forgive him and wait several hours to hear an explanation as to WHY he did what he did. It doesn't help that for me, his backstory just feels weaker than everyone else, which makes withholding it until the very end all the more unreasonable.

We got like 85% of Kiku's backstory in the beginning of his route, which helped in understanding why his relationship with Azami was so fraught. Sharaku opens up about his backstory a little over halfway through his route in a moment of emotional intimacy, which helps in understanding/justifying his outlandish behavior before and also significantly shifts the tone/feeling of his relationship with Rin moving forward. And we're drip-fed Goemon and Rin's semi-shared backstory throughout his entire route, like getting one piece of a puzzle at a time and finally getting to complete it near the end.

Even if you disagree that Yona's backstory of growing up an outsider, desperate for love and attention, ultimately getting deceived and dying before getting what he wanted isn't as compelling as the others... the placement of it (not even told to Rin as part of bonding and/or apologizing! told to Sansaburo to try and get through to him and keep things "honorable"!) still bugs me. We should have gotten some or even all of it early on in the route, so that we could understand and forgive what he'd done. Because personally without any context, I wasn't okay with how his fighting dirty nearly got Rin killed, and the fact that SHE was okay with it made it all the more vexing.

My issue with the beginning of this route then rippled out to impair the middle a bit. Because while I could definitely understand why Yona would like Rin so much... every scene of her being super into him just felt unearned. And the fact that it was discovering he read books that might sometimes have smut in them being what DID briefly turn her off from him? Ugh. It's fine if he's a dumbass who nearly got you killed for (seemingly) no good reason, but I guess liking porn is inexcusable. Priorities, girl!

IN ISOLATION, I think nearly all of their romantic moments are very solid. It's just that because their starting position was so poisoned for me, it was hard to reconcile Rin liking him at all at that point. All that said, the route definitely got better over time and the last few chapters were very solid. By then there'd been enough development that I could buy the romance despite my initial hangups, so I could fully enjoy their relationship when it finally blossomed. And Yona's confrontation with Sansaburo was pretty good too.

Once again, this route made good use of Fujimori. His dynamic was certainly more strained with Yona than Kiku, but the story used that to give Yona a necessary wake-up call, I think. I love that both guys got something valuable from the other, with Yona getting more accepting/comfortable around technology and how things are now compared to when he lived, and Fujimori being shown that looks and strength alone don't define a person or make them happy/successful, which encouraged him to be more confident in himself and accepting of others.

Sharaku: I'll admit that I had a bit of a bias going into this route since due to his VA and certain mannerisms, I already liked Sharaku a lot. He reminded me of Marius from Tears of Themis (same Japanese VA, similarly flirty and overtly manipulative in a childish way that I find endearing rather than upsetting).

That said his route is certainly... a lot. And I can bet he'll be a "love him or hate him" type for a lot of people. Personally, I love him, though I absolutely understand why he might turn off or really upset others. He comes on STRONG in the beginning, pushing for sex as a way to "bond" and "develop trust" with Rin.

That's obviously not okay, but for me it's enough that after Rin electrocutes him and sets a boundary, he doesn't cross it again (arguably. We'll get into that). Rather, while he still brings up the idea of having sex often, it's more playful/joking, and he physically keeps a safe distance. To me this reads as him making it clear that while he's still down for or wants it himself, he IS respecting her wishes by not pushing for it. He's just letting her know it's still on the table as an option if she ever changes her mind.

Personally I don't think the idea that he's "coercing" her into it holds water when, later in the route, she DOES decide she wants to have sex with him in a moment of desperation, but he TURNS HER DOWN. By then, he knows her well enough and CARES about her enough that he doesn't want to do anything she's not fully onboard with. Consent isn't enough. He wants her feelings to matter, too. For them, for the bond they now have, sex is no longer a means to an end, and he won't let her reduce it to that even when that was once what he wanted.

Sharaku is a very messy individual. His backstory is HEAVY. I might have a small corner of my mind permanently stuck ruminating on how he was forced to live as a prostitute for an unknown length of time just to make ends meet, and then eventually got OUT of that life and started supporting himself financially with art instead, just to ultimately die at the ripe old age of eighteen. Because he eventually got caught for the crime of mercy killing women who BEGGED him to do it. It's just... a lot.

All the characters' backstories inform their personality and behavior in the present, but I really feel it with Sharaku. He's been desensitized to sex, possibly as a coping mechanism for what he's been through. From his perspective, it's nothing more than a physical act at this point, and what better way to "get close" to someone? There's also the idea that prostitutes are trained/perceptive when it comes to romance. It's a trait that all the "prostitute" characters we see share, even Shinobikuni. While I doubt anyone would argue that Goemon knows Rin as a person best, it's definitely Sharaku who notices the budding romances on every route. He even took it a step farther and tried to play matchmaker for Yona! He's also the one to notice and call out that Goemon is softer towards Rin right from the start, even if he tries to hide it and act as uncaring/aloof as the others.

I think this also extends to his route though. When Rin really starts to fall for Sharaku, HE NOTICES. He's completely unsurprised when other people infer that Rin is in love with him. The "school uniform date" and his kissing her were prompted by him responding to her feelings. It's just that there's a miscommunication here. He hasn't let her know how HE feels (and to be fair at that point he might still be figuring it out, going along with things because that's what he's used to doing), thus she assumes he's playing with her feelings and gets upset.

Something I really love about Sharaku's route is that he takes it upon himself, multiple times, to try and change or open up to Rin, without being forced or prompted to. His most sincere, vulnerable moments are predated by him unintentionally hurting her, and then resolving to do better. Which he does! When he sees how their blood bond has barely risen, it's clear that it hurts Rin. And he KNOWS it's his own trust issues to blame, so he pushes through the discomfort to open up to her, at least a little, prompting the first big spike in the blood bond. When he takes their "date" too far by kissing her and Rin runs off crying, he finally opens up about his past to her once he finds her.

Rin herself ALSO makes an effort to change, after Sharaku calls her out for being overbearing and falling back on her training to mistreat the prisoners. This isn't really an issue in other routes, since she has a good relationship with the other love interests, but here, her initially strained relationship with Sharaku makes it harder to shake off her training and treat the men the way she WANTS to treat them. The struggle makes it more impactful than the other routes where she just decides to change and then... does, without effort, IMO.

Sharaku as a person and his relationship with Rin is just... so much more complicated and messy than the other routes. Outside of JacK where she's literally romancing the enemy, this is the only time she has any real conflict WITH her love interest as opposed to a conflict elsewhere. But it makes perfect sense that these two would butt heads given their near polar opposite personalities and his... wealth of romantic/sexual experience compared to her literal blank slate. If anything it's a miracle they reached a compromise!

This route COULD have been a disaster. With Sharaku's backstory and obsession with sex, it could have gone to some truly unpleasant, unforgivable places. But for me, this route was beautiful. This is a route where two VERY different individuals both decided, of their own volition, to try to be better for the other person. They weren't being forced to change by an outside party, nor were they fundamentally changing who they were. Rather they were allowing themselves to be vulnerable, exposing their soft underbellies to the other. To meet the other halfway. This was harder for Sharaku, naturally, but they both managed it and from their initial tense and distant acquaintance, a healthy and beautiful love bloomed.

JacK/Tetsunojo: This route had the misfortune to sit between Sharaku, who I clearly hyper-fixated on, and Goemon, who has a lot of "true/final route" reveals to dig into. Thus I admit I probably didn't give this route as much attention as I should have.

That said, from what I remember, it's solid. I appreciate that the more you learn about him, the more Tetsunojo comes across as just a chuuni. A total loser playing at being edgy and cool. His mostly one-sided vendetta against Goemon is also a lot of fun. It's hilarious to think about how Goemon didn't know or care about him at all until his own route, where he ultimately DID "beat" Goemon entirely unintentionally, by stealing his girl.

I was a bit miffed for a decent chunk of the route because it seemed the writing couldn't decide how much, if at all, Tetsunojo actually liked Rin or if he was just using her all along. He certainly turned HARD on her when he got what he wanted. But then the story slowly walked it back and he DID like her, he was just pushing her away. The execution was a bit sloppy and frustrating, but not terrible I guess.

I'm torn between liking and hating that this is the route where Rin finally gets to be proactive. In general I like it when the heroine is more assertive and goes for what she wants. But where was that in the other routes? You're saving it for here, the route where from a logical standpoint it makes most sense NOT to pursue him, especially once he's threatened your life? It feels like she's only proactive because this relationship would never get off the ground otherwise, whereas living with the other guys - most of whom are confident and willing to make moves themselves - gives plenty of opportunity for romance without Rin forcing it.

Ultimately while the romance was okay, this relationship was probably still my least favorite because it lowkey took Rin away from her other love interests. That's her found family! It's like Sholmes' route in the Code Realize FD. Even IF the route and relationship is solid, you don't take the girl away from her group of friends! Thankfully Tetsunojo joined the group at the end (even getting his own mug! Truly Goemon is a softie to do such a thing for the guy that stole his girl) rather than completely taking Rin away, but this route still felt removed from the group dynamic we see everywhere else.

Goemon: He was SO soft and attentive to her, in general but especially his own route. You'd think after a few hundred years he would at least start to move on, but no, he's clearly still down bad for her. VERY cute.

I loved getting little peeks of his jealousy in other routes. When he lost his cool at the manager asking if Rin is a virgin, wishing to himself that they WERE having a rendezvous when Sharaku caught them together, a lot of his behavior in JacK's route... It all got me amped up for his route, for sure.

I have basically no complaints about the romance in this route, or at least nothing too critical. The pacing is a bit wonky at times, but I think that can be explained as Rin is essentially starting at 0 for Goemon while HE is starting damn near 100 for her - as shown by the blood bond, even! He near fully loves and trusts her from the start, so the route is just getting her to the same place he is and revealing their shared backstory.

They have a lot of sweet moments together. I love how she made him "poison" onigiri which he then made sure to warn off others so he could keep them to himself. I love how for a good chunk of the route Rin was despairing over being in a love triangle with HERSELF. I do wish she had confronted him directly, told him it hurt to be compared to or a replacement for that girl. But we got something similar at least that FINALLY led to him telling her the truth.

As for their backstory, it really is a tragedy. Their own hesitations and insecurities kept them apart. He didn't want to drag her into his problems, she didn't want to tie him down since she was blind and he was a free spirit. And yet even though they never got together she was STILL killed just because of her association to him. Which meant he was right to blame himself for it, to an extent. The fact that her ONE sin that sent her to hell was telling a lie that hurt him is the cherry on top of this painful sundae. Oof.

The plot/conflict outside of the romance is where this route loses me a little. It just has a bit too much going on, including TWO separate twist villains! Surely one of them could have been used elsewhere? Personally I would say Sharaku's route because the idea of finding Oshichi's lost love is brought up there too and yet for some reason it's Goemon's route where they have the idea to have Sharaku draw the guy based on Oshichi's description.

I mostly liked Fujimori's inclusion in this route once again. The bond he and Goemon had in the past and start to form again is very sweet. That said, I don't really like how it's implied he was also close with Rin (to the point where he called her sister at one point and she also felt like he was a little brother to her) yet we NEVER got interactions between them in flashbacks. It's hard to buy that relationship when we don't actually see it.

I think both twist villains were done very sloppily. Kamuro's actions just don't seem to fit with what we've learned about angels and how they're basically stupid and useless and GOOD. How on earth did an angel with those kind of restrictions for getting into Heaven (remember, telling a SINGLE lie that hurt someone got Rin cast into Hell) end up even capable of evil? And Shiroku...

He was an incredibly weird combination of OVERLY foreshadowed and not nearly foreshadowed enough. He has a very distinct silhouette so it's clearly him we see in Rin's nightmare flashback at the beginning of the route, making him immediately suspicious. And yet in all his prior appearances and up until the end of the route, he does nothing to raise suspicion. If not for that one moment we'd have NO reason to doubt him. And then again, literal minutes before the reveal, we get the second piece of evidence against him. Which is... Sharaku - the MOST guarded and untrusting of the group - thinks he's suspicious and doesn't want Rin to go off alone with him. Again, a rather heavy-handed piece of foreshadowing, and yet it's potentially ruined or overlooked since it's coming from Sharaku.

In theory, I'm fine with Shiroku being a twist villain. Especially since Goemon's primary "flaw" is that he's too soft/trusting towards those he cares about. So having a trusted longtime friend stab him in the back makes sense. It's just the execution sucks. And Shiroku as a villain is not nearly as interesting or likable compared to the main five. His motivation is... feeling spurned that Goemon left so he decides to go full evil?

Meanwhile the five escapees are all seemingly GOOD or at least neutral people who just lived awful lives - or in Asaemon's case, he was a guy with a really bad job. But someone's gotta do it - and now want a chance to live happier, peaceful lives as opposed to continuing to suffer in Hell as if their lives before death weren't bad enough.

Compared to all the others, Shiroku taking over as the last minute true bad guy was disappointing. It made sense that Goemon wouldn't fight Shinobikuni since she seemingly wasn't a fighter, but what I really expected and felt outright ripped off not to get was a fight with Okuni. Of ALL the escapees, Okuni got the least development and time to shine. But since it was established she KNEW Goemon and she had a really cool power that COULD be used in a fight, I expected her to be the "final boss", as it were. Instead she literally never faces off against anyone directly, instead just retaliating against Yona in his route when he fights dirty against Sansaburo. She was SO cool and SO underutilized.

She was shafted in favor of a pretty shit twist villain though. In the end her "importance" boiled down to being the source of a popular legend that Rin secretly liked - after death, being cared across the Sanzu River on your lover's back. At least that concept finally got to come full circle when Goemon carried Rin home on his back after the final battle. That was a nice detail. He wasn't able to go to her in death, but they first reunited at the riverbank that she was staring wistfully at, and he got as close as he could to fulfilling her wishes in the end.

I suppose it was too much to expect a violent battle between a man and a woman in an otome, especially with the woman as a final boss of sorts. At least Rin got to contribute to the fight. Not directly, but her powered up ability was instrumental to the fight and the gang couldn't have won without her. So I'll take it.

Misc: A few random final thoughts/observations - this game is very punishing in terms of the choices. A single wrong choice will land you the bad end for a route. In fact, I noticed that a wrong choice early on will ensure a "bad" ending to the chapter and every chapter moving forward. Which is why starting with Yona I made the decision to save scum until around chapter 8 so even if I got a bad end I wouldn't have to redo damn near the entire route.

...Which accidentally led to me NOT getting Goemon or Sharaku's bad endings. I happened to get their final few choices right and haven't seen their bad endings. That said, based on the OTHER bad endings... I don't mind that you fall into those endings so easily. There ARE unique CGs and the endings are about 20 minutes of unique content. And it seems like the bad endings aren't even "bad" so much as bittersweet, stalling a happy ending that WILL still come in the future. Plus the music for the bad end movie is a BOP that I will GLADLY listen to.

One other thing I noticed that bothers me a tad is that the routes follow a very similar formula in terms of the romantic development. You can see this very clearly while looking at the CGs for different guys. All five guys have exactly 15 "unique" CGs, the difference being how many of those have variations, and how many of said variations there are. Exactly 2 of those unique CGs are for the bad ends, with another locked away in the bonus "Memory" content. ALL FIVE guys have their "happy" end with a CG that is just before the couple has sex. Kiku, Yona, and Sharaku all have Rin kiss their mark to take their pain twice, with the second time leading to another CG of the pair kissing. That kiss CG is even the 9th one for all of them, and it's the last CG before the happy/bad end split. Goemon only has one "kiss the pain away" scene, but his also immediately leads to a proper kiss as well.

While the specifics for the conflicts and the relationships are different in each route, I just couldn't help but notice this huge consistency in when and how the romantic beats happened. There are definitely minor ways in which routes are the same in other games (like tending to the needs of a Fury in Hakuouki), but I couldn't help but notice EVERY route ending in a sex scene. EVERY route having the first (mutual, in Sharaku's case) kiss after Rin took the guy's pain. It's a minor nitpick, but by the third route I was starting to really sense when things would happen and accurately predict incoming CGs. So it took me out of the story a bit.

In terms of my feelings on the routes as a whole, best to worst: Sharaku > Goemon > Kiku > JacK > Yona

In terms of my feelings on the romance/relationship with Rin: Goemon > Sharaku > Kiku > Yona > JacK

[themovieblogonline]

Top 10 Most Terrifying Game of Thrones Villains

Clashing through the fantastical worlds of The Seven Kingdoms featuring creatures, kings, and crowns, Game of Thrones is a show that also served us some of the most iconic villains in television history. From Cersei Lannister to Petyr Baellish, Tywin Lannister to Walder Frey, these villains have never disappointed us with their clever political conspiracies, jaw-dropping moments of betrayal, and gut-wrenching barbarities. We brought you a list of the top 10 antagonists who kept everyone on their toes. So, let's dive right in! Tywin Lannister Destroy everything and everyone if it's a threat to your family! That is a rule Tywin Lannister lives by. The cunning lord of Casterly Rock never stood for anything that stopped him from preserving his ancestors' legacy and the Lannister name. Throughout the show, Tywin Lannister conspires toward the fall of his enemies and is always one step ahead of them.  Other than projecting his ruthless tactics toward his foes, Tywin Lannister gave a hard time to all his children as well. In the name of 'doing the right thing', he used his children like pawns and used them till the end. He was particularly harsh to his son Tyrion Lannister, the dwarf, belittling him on every occasion. Can't like this guy even if we want to.  Walder Frey All villains in Game of Thrones had some devilish desires and strong incentives to play the bad guy. Except for Walter Frey. Blinded by ego and superiority, Walder Frey took away some of the most beloved characters from the audience. He was so disgusted over Robb Stark's marriage with an ordinary woman instead of his daughter that he hosted a bloodbath called 'The Red Wedding' where he brutally killed Robb and his pregnant wife. After witnessing the death of her oldest son and his heir, Catelyn Stark slices open her throat, giving us another reason to hate Walder Frey. Craster One of the most bizarre and unpleasant characters in the show is Craster. He owns a shelter in the North and is introduced when Jon Snow resides in his home with his companions. It instantly goes dark when it's revealed that Craster is an old freak with many daughters, all born from incestuous practices. One of the most shocking revelations about him was that he always kills his sons for unknown reasons. Honestly, it doesn't matter if we knew the reason because he would still be one of the worst characters on the show. The High Sparrow Evil can be born from religion as well. Considering various aspects of the psychological conditions of Game of Thrones villains, The High Sparrow is by far the most interesting one. Imagine feeling bad for someone as vile as Cersei! Yeah, The High Sparrow made us feel that. The manipulation and exploitation of religion in the name of holiness make him a human devil.  Allisor Thorne Someone who seemed like an idiotic freak at the beginning of the show later transformed into an unexpected villain. As he teased and tormented most of the Night Watchers, especially Jon Snow, no one really liked Allison from the first day he appeared on screen. However, what blew us all away was his murdering Snow one day and officially becoming worthy of our hatred. Petyr Baelish How far can your smart yet traitorous tricks get you? Ask Petyr Baelish. Also known as "Littlefinger", Baelish is that one character who fans have a love-hate relationship with. From Ned Stark to Sansa Stark, he betrayed and fooled the people around him at every given chance. But even when the fans figured out his poor intentions and foul play, they couldn't stop admiring his way with words. On some level, that makes him one of the most formidable villains in the show.  Cersei Lannister Just like Petyr, we remained forever mystified about whether to like Cersei Lannister or loathe her wholeheartedly. Fabricating intelligently orchestrated plans coming from a place of pure darkness, she carried the entire show by being the ultimate villain. She not only betrayed her husband by producing children incestuously but also planned the death of thousands of people at the Great Sept of Baelor. It doesn't take a genius to figure out how the Lannisters have a wicked philosophy of throwing everyone under the bus if it's about self-interest.  Joffrey Baratheon Joffrey showing his true colors after his coronation was a plot twist in Game of Thrones that no one saw coming. Right when he ordered Ned Stark, we knew what was lurking under that innocent demeanor Joffrey carries all the time. After the first season, Joffrey established himself as a terrorizing force but as the show progressed, it was no surprise that his reckless decisions made him some great enemies who didn't hesitate to murder him. The Night King Let's talk about that one frightening monster who had no sense of humanity whatsoever. Simply because he wasn't a human. The Night King was born to kill. All that he was capable of was turning everyone into an army of the walking dead. From the first time he made an appearance in the show, he ignited fear in the eyes of the spectators. Ramsay Bolton How can we end this list without talking about the nastiest of them all? Ramsay Bolton, the son of Roose Bolton, took over the North and initiated his series of atrocities upon the Northerners. During the show, he abused many characters including his wife Sansa Stark, and Theon Greyjoy. Emotion is a concept alien to Ramsay and that shows when he ends up killing his entire family to avoid risking his position as the king. That distinguishes him from all the other villains of the show as his motives for attaining power are purely narcissistic and selfish. Overall Thoughts The world of Game of Thrones is full of lots of characters that left lasting impressions. When you think back the show is rich in jaw-dropping moments and heart-pumping excitement. There were characters that were both heroic and villainous, but which one of them was the worst? Don't forget to let us know your thoughts in the comments below! Read the full article

[no1monstersimp]

14 and 15

WARNING THIS WILL BE VERY RANTY

Sorry this took a bit to answer haha, I was thinking about these ones for a little bit and I wanted to be able to type it out on my laptop because this may be long(and my laptop is slow). This will be a pretty heavy one.

So lets start with 14 -sigh-

TW rac*sm, h*m*phobia, ped*philia, r*pe, inc*st.

I'm sure this isn't unpopular, but my opinion about the fandom is it's pretty bad. Of course I love most of the users on here and have overall been very pleasant to interact with, but the issues are very overwhelming and become more apparent on the Reddit. You can say, it's just the Reddit, but I've seen these issues on Instagram, Twitter, and pretty much everywhere else. Some of the major issues are homophobia, racism, and the very concerning amount of pedophilia jokes/normalization.

So let's start with the homophobia portion.

As I'm sure everyone has experienced sometime in the fandom, there is an overwhelming amount of homophobia within the fandom. Let's take GenoSai for an instant. Whether like the ship or not, there is definitely a double standard among the fandom. Art where the ship is Genoko(Genos genderbend) x Saitama, it is perfectly fine and little heads are turned, but as soon as you mention Genos x Saitama, everyone goes batshit. They like to say it's because "ships don't belong in the fandom" but then turn around and ship Saitama and Tatsumaki or Saitama and Fubuki. They even go as far as to say "making them gay is disrespectful to the character or it ruins them". I'm sorry but if you're that delusional, I don't even know what to say honestly. Certain users got up and arms about the Batarou ship as of late after the reveal of Kiro in 170. Many users were sent unprovoked abhorrent asks or comments all because they ship them. Some have also downplayed the fact that bisexuality exists as well because of this, just stating "Garou isn't gay" or "Garou doesn't like men". There have been some that have written amazing essays on it so I won't go too deep into it here. Another thing is the downplay of LGBT voices in the fandom. They constantly harass LGBT users for having gay ships or other LGBT ships, when all we literally want is representation. It angers me when they say "well you have Puri Prisoner" and I'm sorry, but fuck that. I literally hate the character. They have no right to speak over us and preach what an acceptable character to represent the community is. No right at all...

Anyways... back to double standards, lesbian ships are more accepted because they are fetishizing them. Some of the most popular are Psykos x Fubuki, Fubuki x Do-S, and...ugh...Fubuki x Lily. So they ignore a literal 14 year old and 23 year old and think it's okay but somehow two consenting male adults in a relationship is worse??? Same thing with incestual relationships such as Fubuki x Tatsumaki.

A smaller section is the way they excuse Darkshine. I understand the intention may not have meant to be racist, but at the end of the day we can't keep excusing it. I feel awful when I remember his backstory because he's not a bad character, in the sense that he's a good guy.

Ah the pedophilia jokes and the normalization. I can't tell you how many times I've seen really disgusting jokes about the child characters in sexual situations. The thing is, they aren't even funny. As mentioned before, they already normalize the relationship between a 14 year old and someone she looks up to, who is 23. Well, let's dive into their favorite thing, One Hurricane. There is a volume of this lovely series , I say sarcastically, in which Child Emperor( a 10 year old) is raped by Fubuki (yet again, a 23 year old) and I sadly laid my eyes on a panel. Fubuki is sexually assaulted by Saitama multiple times throughout the series as well as Do-s in one volume. They still celebrate the series as "so good" when it literally excuses rape ad pedophilia. It pisses me off so bad. There are many users who draw or post incest, pedophilia, rape and are celebrated. It's sad I can think of so many off the top of my head, BY NAME.

I have some other things I want to talk about but the post is getting long...

I'll do a briefing of things I don't like about the manga itself. I don't like the way Kama is treated, she's way too beautiful to be presented the way she is. Especially in the webcomic when her name was "Slicing Shemale". I understand that there is apparently some translation issues, but sometimes I wonder.

I already talked about Darkshine and Puri.

[cappymightwrite]

What draws you to incest ?

*sighs* Ok, here we go. I'm a real card carrying Jonsa now aren't I?

Anon, listen. I know this is an anti question that gets bandied about a lot, aimed at provoking, etc, when we all know no Jonsa is out here being all you know what, it really is the incest, and the incest alone, that draws me in. I mean, come on now. Grow up.

If I was "drawn" to incest I'd be a fan of Cersei x Jaime, Lucrezia x Cesare, hell Oedipus x Jocasta etc... but I haven't displayed any interest in them now, have I? So, huh, it can't be that.

Frankly, it's a derivitive question that is really missing the mark. I'm not "drawn" to it, though yeah, it is an unavoidable element of Jonsa. The real question you should be asking though, is what draws GRRM to it? Because he obviously is drawn to it, specifically what is termed the "incest motif" in academic and literary scholarship. That is a far more worthwhile avenue of thinking and questioning, compared with asking me. Luckily for you though anon, I sort of anticipated getting this kind of question so had something in my drafts on standby...

You really don't have to look far, or that deeply, to be hit over the head by the connection between GRRM's literary influences and the incest motif. I mean, let's start with the big cheese himself, Tolkein:

Tolkein + Quenta Silmarillion

We know for definite that GRRM has been influenced by Tolkein, and in The Silmarillion you notably have a case of unintentional incest in Quenta Silmarillion, where Túrin Turambar, under the power of a curse, unwittingly murders his friend, as well as marries and impregnates his sister, Nienor Níniel, who herself had lost her memory due to an enchantment.

Mr Tolkein, "what draws you to incest?"

Old Norse + Völsunga saga

Tolkein, as a professor of Anglo-Saxon, was hugely influenced by Old English and Old Norse literature. The story of the ring Andvaranaut, told in Völsunga saga, is strongly thought to have been a key influence behind The Lord of the Rings. Also featured within this legendary saga is the relationship between the twins Signy and Sigmund — at one point in the saga, Signy tricks her brother into sleeping with her, which produces a son, Sinfjotli, of pure Völsung blood, raised with the singular purpose of enacting vengence.

Anonymous Norse saga writer, "what draws you to incest?"

Medieval Literature as a whole

A lot is made of how "true" to the storied past ASOIAF is, how reflective it is of medieval society (and earlier), its power structures, its ideals and martial values etc. ASOIAF, however, is not attempting historical accuracy, and should not be read as such. Yet it is clearly drawing from a version of the past, as depicted in medieval romances and pre-Christian mythology for instance, as well as dusty tomes on warfare strategy. As noted by Elizabeth Archibald in her article Incest in Medieval Literature and Society (1989):

Of course the Middle Ages inherited and retold a number of incest stories from the classical world. Through Statius they knew Oedipus, through Ovid they knew the stories of Canace, Byblis, Myrrha and Phaedra. All these stories end more or less tragically: the main characters either die or suffer metamorphosis. Medieval readers also knew the classical tradition of incest as a polemical accusation,* for instance the charges against Caligula and Nero. – p. 2

The word "polemic" is connected to controversy, to debate and dispute, therefore these classical texts were exploring the incest motif in order to create discussion on a controversial topic. In a way, your question of "what draws you to incest?" has a whiff of polemical accusation to it, but as I stated, you're missing the bigger question.

Moving back to the Middle Ages, however, it is interesting that we do see a trend of more incest stories appearing within new narratives between the 11th and 13th centuries, according to Archibald:

The texts I am thinking of include the legend of Judas, which makes him commit patricide and then incest before betraying Christ; the legend of Gregorius, product of sibling incest who marries his own mother, but after years of rigorous penance finally becomes a much respected pope; the legend of St Albanus, product of father-daughter incest, who marries his mother, does penance with both his parents but kills them when they relapse into sin, and after further penance dies a holy man; the exemplary stories about women who sleep with their sons, and bear children (whom they sometimes kill), but refuse to confess until the Virgin intervenes to save them; the legends of the incestuous begetting of Roland by Charlemagne and of Mordred by Arthur; and finally the Incestuous Father romances about calumniated wives, which resemble Chaucer's Man of Law's Tale except that the heroine's adventures begin when she runs away from home to escape her father's unwelcome advances. – p. 2

I mean... that last bit sounds eerily quite close to what we have going on with Petyr Baelish and Sansa Stark. But I digress. What I'm trying to say is that from a medieval and classical standpoint... GRRM is not unique in his exploration of the incest motif, far from it.

Sophocles, Ovid, Hartmann von Aue, Thomas Malory, etc., "what draws you to incest?"

Faulkner + The Sound and the Fury, and more!

Moving on to more modern influences though, when talking about the writing ethos at the heart of his work, GRRM has famously quoted William Faulker:

His mantra has always been William Faulkner’s comment in his Nobel prize acceptance speech, that only the “human heart in conflict with itself… is worth writing about”. [source]

I’ve never read any Faulker, so I did just a quick search on “Faulkner and incest” and I pulled up this article on JSTOR, called Faulkner and the Politics of Incest (1998). Apparently, Faulkner explores the incest motif in at least five novels, therefore it was enough of a distinctive theme in his work to warrant academic analysis. In this journal article, Karl F. Zender notes that:

[...] incest for Faulkner always remains tragic [...] – p. 746

Ah, we can see a bit of running theme here, can't we? But obviously, GRRM (one would hope) doesn’t just appreciate Faulkner’s writing for his extensive exploration of incest. This quote possibly sums up the potential artistic crossover between the two:

Beyond each level of achieved empathy in Faulkner's fiction stands a further level of exclusion and marginalization. – pp. 759–60

To me, the above parallels somewhat GRRM’s own interest in outcasts, in personal struggle (which incest also fits into):

I am attracted to bastards, cripples and broken things as is reflected in the book. Outcasts, second-class citizens for whatever reason. There’s more drama in characters like that, more to struggle with. [source]

Interestingly, however, this essay on Faulkner also connects his interest in the incest motif with the romantic poets, such as Percy Bysshe Shelley and Lord Byron:

As Peter Thorslev says in an important study of romantic representations of incest, " [p]arent-child incest is universally condemned in Romantic literature...; sibling incest, on the other hand, is invariably made sympathetic, is sometimes exonerated, and, in Byron's and Shelley's works, is definitely idealized.” – p. 741

Faulkner, "what draws you to incest?" ... I mean, that article gives some good explanations, actually.

Lord Byron, Manfred + The Bride of Abydos

Which brings us onto GRRM interest in the Romantics:

I was always intensely Romantic, even when I was too young to understand what that meant. But Romanticism has its dark side, as any Romantic soon discovers... which is where the melancholy comes in, I suppose. I don't know if this is a matter of artistic influences so much as it is of temperament. But there's always been something in a twilight that moves me, and a sunset speaks to me in a way that no sunrise ever has. [source]

I'm already in the process of writing a long meta about the influence of Lord Byron in ASOIAF, specifically examining this quote by GRRM:

The character I’m probably most like in real life is Samwell Tarly. Good old Sam. And the character I’d want to be? Well who wouldn’t want to be Jon Snow — the brooding, Byronic, romantic hero whom all the girls love. Theon [Greyjoy] is the one I’d fear becoming. Theon wants to be Jon Snow, but he can’t do it. He keeps making the wrong decisions. He keeps giving into his own selfish, worst impulses. [source]

Lord Byron, "what draws you to—", oh, um, right. Nevermind.

I'm not going to repeat myself here, but it's worth noting that there is a clear through line between GRRM and the Romantic writers, besides perhaps melancholic "temperament"... and it's incest.

But look, is choosing to explore the incest motif...well, a choice? Yeah, and an uncomfortable one at that, but it’s obvious that that is what GRRM is doing. I think it’s frankly a bit naive of some people to argue that GRRM would never do Jonsa because it’s pseudo-incest and therefore morally repugnant, no ifs, no buts. I’m sorry, as icky as it may be to our modern eyes, GRRM has set the president for it in his writing with the Targaryens and the Lannister twins.

The difference with them is that they knowingly commit incest, basing it in their own sense of exceptionalism, and there are/will be bad consequences — this arguably parallels the medieval narratives in which incest always ends badly, unless some kind of real penance is involved. For Jon and Sansa, however, the Jonsa argument is that they will choose not to commit incest, despite a confused attraction, and then will be rewarded in the narrative through the parentage reveal, a la Byron’s The Bride of Abydos. The Targaryens and Lannisters, in several ways excluding the incest (geez the amount of times I’ve written incest in this post), are foils for the Starks, and in particular, Jon and Sansa. Exploring the incest motif has been on the cards since the very beginning — just look at that infamous "original" outline — regardless of whether we personally consider that an interesting writing choice, or a morally inexcusable one.

Word of advice, or rather, warning... don't think you can catch me out with these kinds of questions. I have access to a university database, so if I feel like procrastinating my real academic work, I can and will pull out highly researched articles to school you, lmao.

But you know, thanks for the ask anyway, I guess.

[shipcestuous]

(submission)

So...I apologise in advance for the insanely long wall of text I am about to submit to you; like you, I am a long-time connoisseur canon incest, and also I just plain don’t know when to shut up even when I’m not talking about my interests, so this is going to be very detailed, haha.

However, upon looking over your lists, I couldn’t help but notice what to me looked like a big gaping hole: not nearly enough Fire Emblem!!! Growing up in the 00s, Fire Emblem was one of my first ever introductions to incest shipping, and boy is it a doozy! Back then, one of the franchise’s most well-known features was its bizarrely high amounts of incest, to the point that it became almost notorious for it; just look at its entry in some TV Tropes pages, or this comic right here! So, with all that being said, I wanted to give a run-down of the most important canonical blood-related incestuous relationships over the course of the franchise!

Edit: Ahhhhh I realised after I’d already typed all this up that some of these ships actually do already have write-ups, and I just didn’t see them before… But they were written like 5 years ago, so hopefully this is still okay!

Firstly, there’s quite a bit of lower-stakes incest or incest shipping across the franchise; there are quite a number of cousin or step-sibling pairings (either canon or optionally romanceable), as well as the requisite ‘noble girl so obsessively admiring of her older brother that it seems like she’s in love with him’ archetype that shows up often (see e.g. Priscilla/Raven from FE7 and Clarine/Klein from FE6). There’s also Fates, which allows its protagonist to date any of either their many blood- or non-blood-related siblings, but after the supposedly blood-related siblings fall in love it’s revealed they’re not actually related after all, so it doesn’t fit the strict restrictions of this blog! However, there are two games who are especially notorious for their blood-related incest content: Genealogy of the Holy War, and Sacred Stones!

First is Fire Emblem: Genealogy of the Holy War (or FE4), which was released on the SNES. It’s actually the oldest game in the franchise to have never gotten a remake (but there are rumours that one is in the works!), and it’s actually a cult classic within the fandom, beloved for having one of the best stories in the entire franchise, as well as just being a really fantastic game! It’s also had a few adaptations and spin-offs, including a manga by Oosawa Mitsuki covering the events of the entire game, and canonising some potential pairings. FE4 is also known for having one of the darkest stories, and that includes incest. Warning that some of what follows will be heavily spoilery, and also that one of these ships is pretty dark and could be triggering.

Firstly, and least plot-relevantly, there is Eldigan and Lachesis! Lachesis is of the classic ‘noble girl practically in love with her perfect elder brother’ trope who refuses to marry anyone who can’t match up to him (no-one), while Eldigan himself is the picture-perfect image of the courtly knight. Except that in her case, she actually canonically is in love with him! This is confirmed by Lachesis’ daughter Nanna in an optional conversation between Nanna and her cousin Ares (and of course there are plenty who speculate that either of them could actually be a child of Lachesis and Eldigan together), right before she flirts with him, hahaha. Lachesis and Eldigan are half-siblings, though we never really hear anything about their parents; it sorta feels like that’s just to fit them in with the other half-sibling pairings below. Whether Eldigan returns Lachesis’ feelings is deliberately left ambiguous: a commoner woman in one chapter reveals there is ~scandalous gossip~ that the two are involved, but Eldigan never becomes a playable character, so his feelings are more mysterious. However, in the official manga – the one widely regarded as closest to canon – Eldigan eventually admits that he too loves Lachesis more than anyone, and we get this (mildly NSFW) incredibly romantic scene! <3 

(Also while we're here please include this very cute official chibi of Lachesis gushing over her brother~)

Secondly, and Extremely plot-relevantly, we have Arvis and Deirdre. Absolutely everything about this is a spoiler, hahah, but it’s all really important for understanding the relationship. Also, I want to give a Warning, because this is the really not-wholesome relationship. Basically: in this world, magical power is passed down along holy bloodlines. It’s said that by mixing two people of the same bloodline, the child produced will be even more powerful, but that is considered forbidden. This being Fire Emblem, one of the bloodlines is associated with an evil dragon god, so the world tried to destroy that bloodline, eventually leaving only one woman left with that holy blood. She however escaped from her exile and bore two children from two different fathers – Arvis and Deirdre. The former was raised as a noble heir, and must hide his dark blood for fear of a witch-hunt. Deirdre was taken back into exile, and doesn’t know she even has a brother. The dragon cult know all of this, though, and since those two are the only ones left capable of bringing about what is basically the anti-christ, they try to manipulate them into meeting and marrying. Arvis goes along with this because Deirdre’s father is the king, and he has his own reasons for wanting power. Deirdre is magicked into losing her memories (including that of her husband, to whom she had already borne a child named Seliph) and meets Arvis, who she soon marries.

It’s left deliberately unclear how much Arvis actually knows about all this blood-relation stuff – he doesn’t actually want to bring about the anti-christ, and is only going along with the cult because he thinks he can outsmart them. Instead, he insists vehemently that he and Deirdre are in love, and the two siblings have two children together – Julia and Julius. We don’t know too much about their actual relationship, but it seems that Deirdre does believe that she loves him, and cares very deeply for all her children. (Of course, due to the amnesia and effective kidnapping, it’s not fully consensual.)

So, now we have some children, here: Deirdre’s son Seliph, with her first husband, and then Julia and Julius, with her second husband (and half-brother); Seliph is half-brother to them both, and is the protagonist of the second half of the story. He looks much like his father, while Julia looks much like her mother, and they meet (not realising at first that they’re related) in very similar circumstances to Seliph’s parents, framed in a really romantic way. They immediately become very close, not knowing yet that they’re siblings, with Julia clinging to Seliph as her protector and Seliph being so adorably gentle and soft with her <3 Together, they’re sorta the main duo of the second half of the game!

And here is the controversy: in this game, it’s possible to pair characters up together romantically by having them end turns next to each other; do this enough, and they will be married, which causes some gameplay effects. Julia and Seliph actually can be made lovers this way! ...sort of. While there aren’t normally any restrictions on lovepoint-building, the way to make Seliph and Julia get together is very arcane and specific, making it seem like maybe a bug, or something that wasn’t properly removed from the game. Either way, the start the game with the highest lovepoint total of any couple, so they’re clearly meant to be extremely close! And in a conversation between Seliph and a different character, it’s heavily implied that Julia has a crush on Seliph regardless of who you pair them with! Which ads even more interesting subtext to the end of the game, where they become joint rulers of the kingdom together, to the extent that marrying Seliph to anyone else sort of makes it feel more like a polyamorous deal, haha! He and Julia can’t be separated <3

And here’s the other big point: Seliph and Julia are actually a canon endgame relationship in the Oosawa Mitsuki manga!! I haven’t read it yet, but apparently it’s really straightforward and sweet! :) These two are actually really cute together in general, and I love how romantic everything about them is! <3 Once again, a canon (sorta) and consensual pairing! (Though unfortunately I’ve struggled to find screenshots from the manga; I’m not sure the English translation has even reached there, yet… However, here is official art of them both – Seliph is front left and Julia front right!)

Oh, and lastly, the first generation of this game includes a pair of identical twins, and it’s possible to pair their children up together, making them also genetically the equivalent of half-siblings!

So, that’s Genealogy. Now onto a game that, at least while I was growing up, was sorta the face of Fire Emblem’s incest shipping: Ephraim and Eirika! They are from Sacred Stones (FE8), which released for the GBA, and was the second Fire Emblem game to ever be released officially in English. Ephraim and Eirika are the two protagonists and are twins! Interestingly, the very structure of their game already sorta hints at some incestuous subtext: the game is inspired by Fire Emblem Gaiden (FE2), in which the protagonists are a man and woman who ultimately fall in love, with the plot splitting halfway through allowing players to follow either of their paths; FE8 does the same thing, splitting Ephraim and Eirika apart in the plot before joining them together in the end, as though they’re (thematically, at least) equivalent to the other couple!

Ephraim and Eirika are close. Very close. Eirika also dearly loves her older brother, but Ephraim is quite a bit more teasing than previous brothers, and often likes to fluster or upset her, like a schoolboy pulling pigtails. Most infamous is their first Support Conversation (i.e., the conversations that can be unlocked in-game by raising their affection points with one another; unlike FE4, FE8’s affection points aren’t necessarily romantic):

in it, Ephraim offers to ‘stroke Eirika’s face’ like they did when they were children, says that Eirika was always the one pestering him to do it when they were young, and when Eirika becomes embarrassed and reminds him what everyone would think if they saw them, teases her even further and remarks on how often and easily she blushes. It’s suspected by many that this was actually somewhat of a translation, and that truly it was just about Ephraim patting Eirika’s head, which isn’t uncommon in anime between siblings. (Not so sure about real life.)

But there’s more than just that. Their weapons are named Siegmund and Sieglinde; in Vagner’s opera Die Walküre, those were the names of a pair of twins who were separated in childhood, and then fell in love when they met later on! Sort of like the whole separation and reunion structure of this game…? (Fun fact: also in the myths these names come from, Sigmund is the father to Sigurd, who in FE4 is Deirdre’s first husband and Seliph’s father! Does that mean anything here? Not really, apart from the fact that Fire Emblem’s interest in incest is probably inspired from the same mythology it gets so many of its names from, haha.) And finally, if Eirika and Ephraim have the highest support points with one another by the end of the game, they also end up jointly ruling the kingdom together, like Seliph and Julia!

And wait: there’s more! When all of these characters were first added to Fire Emblem Heroes (a mobile game where players can summon characters from various Fire Emblem games), for some reason they added in Julia, Seliph, Ephraim, and Eirika all at the same time, on a ‘sibling love’ banner, which of course many players memed about being an ‘incest banner’. And in the English translation, when Ephraim first meets the player avatar, he for some reason immediately starts talking about how there are people spreading ‘disgusting’ rumours about him and his sister, and how they’re all totally false?! All while Eirika is telling him to be quiet because this is embarrassing?! This wasn’t in the Japanese version, and it immediately became a huge meme because of how bizarre it was, haha – like, it totally sounds as if Ephraim has thought wayyyy too much about this, hahaha :’) (See, e.g., this meme with NSFW-ish text~) 

OH, and another potentially interesting thing about these two: another major character, Lyon, is heavily implied to be in love with either or possibly both of the twins! (They both consider him at least a dear friend, though romantic feelings are less implied.) So it’s pretty common for people to ship them all together, or at least let Lyon live out his twincest fantasies with them, haha!

Last of all, I almost forgot: there is a case of blood incest in Fire Emblem Fates (FE14, for the 3DS)! (And yes, I mean beyond the surprise revelation in the sequel game that the player avatar is the cousin of the main girl, who many people had paired together…) Leo, one of the main characters, is canonically in love with his half-sister (FE4 reference? FE4 remake confirmed???) Camilla! It’s probably meant to be due to their messed-up childhood, where their mothers were pitted against each other as concubines, vying for power. However, Leo’s feelings for Camilla are as far as I’m aware never directly stated in the text. Instead, it’s only revealed through supplementary material. And it doesn’t seem that Camilla feels the same way, as she’s generally too busy doting on her adoptive sibling, the protagonist.

Aaaand now I get to a much newer example of Fire Emblem incest: Heroes, the mobile game! The most important example here is Freyja and Freyr; the two are the keepers of the world of nightmares and dreams respectively, and refer to each other as brother and sister. They have known each other for a very long time, and Freyja has been madly devoted to her brother (of course!) ever since he protected her from being bullied as a child. (It’s unclear if they’re blood-related but the mythological deities they’re named after were also blood-related and incestuous soooooo) Unfortunately, she eventually becomes jealous of Freyr’s love of humans, and tries to destroy them so he will refocus all of his attention on her. He then sadly sacrifices his life to save humanity. It’s never explicitly said that her feelings for him were romantic, but pretty much everyone in the fandom assumes it. They later had a similar case of implied villainous incest with Otr and Fafnir (a very rare case of same-sex incest in Fire Emblem), but they’re adoptive siblings.

So that’s it! I think that’s all, as far as I’m aware of… Though it would not surprise me in the slightest if I missed out on a canon relationship or an extra piece of evidence or two, hahaha! And certainly there’s plenty to ship; I know that there are already plenty of tags on your blog from more recent Fire Emblem games with more active current fanbases, because hoo boy there are a lot of characters and a lot of siblings to pair up! <3

---------

Thank you so much for this great write-up! I have heard a lot about Fire Emblem characters over the years but this was such a fantastic summary of the bro/sis canon, with a few ships I hadn't heard about yet even though at least 20+ have already come up. Fire Emblem, you truly are amazing. There are a lot of Fire Emblem relationships that really deserve to be talked about a lot more. Thank you!

I'm laughing so much at the incest banner.

[wickedjaime]

Jaime & Tyrion: Brotherly Love Defying Societal and Familial Toxicity

Jaime and Tyrion—Handless and Noseless, the Lannister boys!—have only shared two on-page scenes together, and yet their dynamic is one of the most vital and unforgettable ones in all of the novels. They are both so woven within each other's narrative and core that not even barely interacting on page can diminish what they mean to each other, as characters and brothers. What Jaime and Tyrion share is a powerful bond, one that shines through a family otherwise writhe with dysfunction and abuse. 

And how their love is expressed internally and externally showcases their characterization, as well as their relationship’s theme of positive familial affection, and the strength of that—not only within itself, but how it strengthens both brothers. How it helps them deal with ableism, trauma, escape Lannister toxicity, and even learn to understand love outside of one another.

Essay under the cut.

Tyrion’s Influence on Jaime’s Morality, Empathy, and Growth

Jaime's connection to Tyrion is quite essential to his character arc.

For one, his love for Tyrion is one of the first things we learn about Jaime that shows there is more to him than being an incestuous attempted child murderer, and the framing and timing of that information is quite deliberate. We get this quote from Tyrion . . .

During all the terrible long years of his childhood, only Jaime had ever shown him the smallest measure of affection or respect, and for that Tyrion was willing to forgive him most anything. (AGOT, Tyrion I)

. . . after the chapter where Jaime pushes Bran. The reader is first led to see Jaime as a monster by witnessing his monstrous deed, and then gets whiplash on his character. He is someone who fucks his sister and cripples children, but he is also someone who has compassion and love for his disabled brother in an extremely ableist world. This shapes Jaime's character from black to grey, or at the very least, from a darker shade of grey to a lighter one. While Jaime's character was never one dimensional—even in Bran's chapter, his first instinct was to save Bran's life, not take it—revealing that he is kind to his dwarf brother not only shows that there is much more to him than meets the eye, but also furthers the characterization GRRM has given to us so far—that Jaime Lannister is motivated by love, for good or ill. 

Loving Cersei and wanting to protect her caused him to try to murder a child, but loving Tyrion makes Jaime see him as human, despite the ableist society they live in. Love makes Jaime commit good, and evil, and everything in between. Learning how he treats Tyrion is the first time we see Jaime's love manifest in a positive way that not only hurts no one, but actually helps support and heal someone who needs it. In turn, Jaime’s love for Tyrion also manifests in a questionable way, as it was also what led to him having Ned's men murdered, in response to Tyrion's kidnapping:

Jaime Lannister smiled. "Quite true. I'm looking for my brother. You remember my brother, don't you, Lord Stark? He was with us at Winterfell. Fair-haired, mismatched eyes, sharp of tongue. A short man." "I remember him well," Ned replied. "It would seem he has met some trouble on the road. My lord father is quite vexed. You would not perchance have any notion of who might have wished my brother ill, would you?" "Your brother has been taken at my command, to answer for his crimes," Ned Stark said. "Tregar, see that no harm comes to Lord Stark." . . . "Still … we wouldn't want him to leave here entirely unchastened, so"—through the night and the rain, he glimpsed the white of Jaime's smile—"kill his men." (AGOT, Eddard IX)

Jaime's protectiveness of Tyrion contributes to portraying the neutrality of Jaime's love. It is not good or evil; it simply is, and is as unyielding, fierce, and beautiful as his swordplay. Also, loving Tyrion made Jaime understand—though on a subconscious level—Brienne's status as a societal pariah, which caused him to try and make amends with her:

She reminded him of Tyrion in some queer way, though at first blush two people could scarcely be any more dissimilar. Perhaps it was that thought of his brother that made him say, "I did not intend to give offense, Brienne. Forgive me." (ASOS, Jaime II)

He also calls Brienne by her actual name here, rather than wench. This could be because comparing her to Tyrion seemed to humanize her in Jaime's mind, and made him truly empathize with her for the first time. It might have been part of what drew him to her, so it could be argued that Jaime's love and empathy for Tyrion—i.e. having a relationship with a societal pariah—played a part in kickstarting his relationship with Brienne, who is also a pariah because of her appearance, similarly to Tyrion.

It’s quite possible that Jaime seeing past Tyrion’s appearance and loving him regardless was a narrative sign all along that he would fall for someone like Brienne. Obviously Jaime’s familial love for Tyrion isn’t the same as his romance with Brienne, but even still, Jaime kissing Tyrion’s facial scar ...

Then Jaime went to one knee and kissed him quickly once on each cheek, his lips brushing against the puckered ribbon of scar tissue. (ASOS, Tyrion XI)

... shows that ugliness will not stop Jaime from showing affection, even upon that ugliness. Brienne has a newly acquired facial scar as well, on her cheek. Jaime kissing Tyrion’s scar could be foreshadowing for him kissing Brienne’s, especially since he has already realized the two characters’ similarities in his mind. (I am incredibly biased and want a JB Cheek Scar Kiss more than anything, however, so take this tidbit with a grain of salt.)

Jaime is also empathetic and emotionally intelligent enough to compare his maiming to Tyrion's dwarfism, understanding that he has now begun to share the experience of being subjected to ableism, and realizing what Tyrion has had to deal with his entire life:

He had taken wounds before, but never like this. He had never known there could be such pain. Sometimes, unbidden, old prayers bubbled from his lips, prayers he learned as a child and never thought of since, prayers he had first prayed with Cersei kneeling beside him in the sept at Casterly Rock. Sometimes he even wept, until he heard the Mummers laughing. Then he made his eyes go dry and his heart go dead, and prayed for his fever to burn away his tears. Now I know how Tyrion has felt, all those times they laughed at him. (ASOS, Jaime IV)

Before Jaime lost his hand, he couldn't quite understand why Brienne and Tyrion were similar in his mind. Once he becomes disabled, his emotional intelligence and empathy makes him see himself as having acquired a second kinship with Tyrion that goes beyond blood. It's as sad as it is sweet.

After the Rebellion, Tyrion became as much of a coping mechanism for Jaime as Cersei. He relies on both of them to essentially keep his sanity and deal with all of his traumas.

The most overwhelming example of this is the fact that Tyrion was a huge part of the reason Jaime chose not to commit suicide after losing his hand:

The wench had the right of it. He could not die. Cersei was waiting for him. She would have need of him. And Tyrion, his little brother, who loved him for a lie. . . . . When morning came, he made himself eat. . . . Live, he told himself harshly, when the mush was like to gag him, live for Cersei, live for Tyrion. Live for vengeance. (ASOS, Jaime IV)

Even when Jaime is in an ungodly amount of pain and mental anguish, he is selflessly thinking of the welfare of his little brother, and how he must live—not for himself, but so that he can protect Tyrion. Protecting Tyrion also played a part in severing Jaime's ties with Cersei:

She clutched his good hand and held it tight in hers. "He told me he was going to do it. Joff knew. As he was dying, he pointed at his murderer. At our twisted little monster of a brother." She kissed Jaime's fingers. "You'll kill him for me, won't you? You'll avenge our son." Jaime pulled away. "He is still my brother." He shoved his stump at her face, in case she failed to see it. "And I am in no fit state to be killing anyone." "You have another hand, don't you? I am not asking you to best the Hound in battle. Tyrion is a dwarf, locked in a cell. The guards would stand aside for you." The thought turned his stomach. "I must know more of this. Of how it happened." (ASOS, Jaime VII)

This was not the first time Jaime has protected Tyrion from Cersei’s violence. He did when they were children, as well:

[... Oberyn Martell] continued. . . . “When I commented that you seemed a poor sort of monster, your sister said, 'He killed my mother,' and twisted your little cock so hard I thought she was like to pull it off. You shrieked, but it was only when your brother Jaime said, 'Leave him be, you're hurting him,' that Cersei let go of you. (ASOS, Tyrion V)

However, it was the first time Jaime denied something so substantial to Cersei, and it was out of love for Tyrion. He chose to protect his brother, rather than carry out his sister's command and murder him. 

It should also be noted that Jaime believes that Tyrion wouldn’t have killed Joffrey simply because Joffrey is Jaime’s seed: 

"He killed him, Jaime. Just as he'd warned me. One day when I thought myself safe and happy he would turn my joy to ashes in my mouth, he said."

"Tyrion said that?" Jaime had not wanted to believe it. . . . He knew the boy was mine. (ASOS, Jaime VII)

And Jaime was right—Tyrion explicitly had the thought that he would never hurt Joffrey, not because child murder is wrong lmao, but because Joffrey is Jaime’s son, and Tyrion loves Jaime:

A chill crept down Tyrion's spine as he realized what [Bronn] was hinting at. If Tommen was king . . .

There was only one way Tommen would become king. No, he could not even think it. Joffrey was his own blood, and Jaime's son as much as Cersei's. (ACOK, Tyrion IX)

Jaime believes Tyrion’s innocence because of their mutual love and positive bond, and it contributes to his estrangement with Cersei. 

Jaime then later frees Tyrion from prison and saves his life, despite knowing Cersei wanted him executed:

He had waited in the eunuch's chambers that night, when at last he had decided not to let his little brother die. (AFFC, Jaime I)

And even when Tyrion lies and claims to have murdered Joffrey, Jaime still does not obey Cersei and “avenge their son” as she asked:

“ . . . And I am the monster they all say I am. Yes, I killed your vile son." He made himself grin. It must have been a hideous sight to see, there in the torchlit gloom.

Jaime turned without a word and walked away. (ASOS, Tyrion IX)

Jaime prioritizes his need to protect Tyrion over carrying out Cersei’s desires; he cannot bring himself to hurt his brother, even after such a confession. Thrice Jaime is caught between his brother’s safety and his sister’s violence, and thrice he chooses safety.

Jaime's positive love for Tyrion is a key factor in showing Jaime's growth, and finding an identity outside of Cersei. The fact that Jaime has always loved Tyrion while Cersei despised him, and chooses Tyrion’s safety over Cersei’s satisfaction—even when they were children—was one of the many evidences that he was always an individual, always his own person, as opposed to simply one half of Cersei’s whole. However, in actively defying a direct order of Cersei’s by choosing Tyrion, Jaime is starting to realize that for himself. And while on his journey of self discovery, his love for Tyrion—something that overcomes the darkness and toxicity that his sister and their incest promotes—is one of the things about himself that he keeps.

Jaime’s Effect on Tyrion 

While Tyrion is one of Jaime's coping mechanisms, Jaime is Tyrion's safe place in turn. For Tyrion's entire life, Jaime was the only one who has shown him love and protected him, and so, Tyrion sees him as his hero and protector:

"Imp," Lysa said coldly, "[. . .] Remember where you are. This is the Eyrie, and these are knights of the Vale you see around you, true men who loved Jon Arryn well. Every one of them would die for me." "Lady Arryn, should any harm come to me, my brother Jaime will be pleased to see that they do." [. . .] Lysa glared at him. "You demanded a trial by combat." "And now I demand a champion, such as you have chosen for yourself. My brother Jaime will gladly take my part, I know." (AGOT, Tyrion V) "They made me fight a battle without my big brother to protect me." (ASOS, Tyrion XI)

When Tyrion is saved at the Blackwater, he thinks it must be Jaime who has rescued him, as no one else would have cared to:

And suddenly he lurched to the left, staggering into the rail. Wood split, and Ser Mandon Moore vanished with a shout and a splash. An instant later, the hulls came slamming together again, so hard the deck seemed to jump. Then someone was kneeling over him. "Jaime?" he croaked, almost choking on the blood that filled his mouth. Who else would save him, if not his brother? (ACOK, Tyrion XIV)

He also tries to emulate Jaime to feel brave when he is in times of distress:

Tyrion wondered whether this was the last sunrise he would ever see … and whether wondering was a mark of cowardice. Did his brother Jaime ever contemplate death before a battle? (AGOT, Tyrion VIII)

The painted wooden armor clattered as Pretty trotted across the deck. Tyrion's armpits were prickly with perspiration, and a bead of sweat was trickling down his scar beneath the oversized, ill-fitting helm, yet for one absurd moment he felt almost like Jaime, riding out onto a tourney field with lance in hand, his golden armor flashing in the sun. (ADWD, Tyrion IX)

And dreams of being like him:

This time he dreamed he was at a feast, a victory feast in some great hall. He had a high seat on the dais, and men were lifting their goblets and hailing him as hero. Marillion was there, the singer who'd journeyed with them through the Mountains of the Moon. He played his woodharp and sang of the Imp's daring deeds. Even his father was smiling with approval. When the song was over, Jaime rose from his place, commanded Tyrion to kneel, and touched him first on one shoulder and then on the other with his golden sword, and he rose up a knight. Shae was waiting to embrace him. She took him by the hand, laughing and teasing, calling him her giant of Lannister. (ACOK, Tyrion XV)

I think this is why learning the truth of Tysha—and Jaime's part in that deception—was the last straw for Tyrion, and caused him to have a psychotic break. Tyrion has always been abused, neglected, and refused love by everyone but Jaime. Only with Jaime does he feel loved, and safe, and humanized. After losing his trial by battle and awaiting death, Tyrion thinks Jaime is the last and only good thing in his life, the one positive constant. Jaime comes to free him, and Tyrion’s elated, feels protected again . . . and then Jaime drops the bomb, that he lied about Tysha, and that Tywin made him do it. 

It was a betrayal Tyrion couldn't handle. Tyrion saw Tywin as taking the last precious thing from him—the pure and untainted bond he had with his big brother—as well as a stolen future he could have had with Tysha. Losing Tysha and Jaime at the same time broke him. That alone shows Jaime’s importance to Tyrion.

Defying Tywin’s Toxicity

What I find especially tragic about the Tysha thing is that, while Jaime did betray him, it was done out of love:

"She was no whore. I never bought her for you. That was a lie that Father commanded me to tell. [. . .]” [. . .] Jaime could not meet his eyes. Tysha. He tried to remember what she had looked like. A girl, she was only a girl, no older than Sansa. "My wife," he croaked. "She wed me." "For your gold, Father said. She was lowborn, you were a Lannister of Casterly Rock. All she wanted was the gold, which made her no different from a whore, so . . . so it would not be a lie, not truly, and . . . he said that you required a sharp lesson. That you would learn from it, and thank me later . . ." (ASOS, Tyrion XI)

Tywin convinced Jaime that Tysha was only using Tyrion for his money, that she didn't love him, and that lying to break them up would save Tyrion from future heartbreak. Tywin knew Jaime's love for Tyrion and desire to protect him would make him follow his command. And Tywin knew that Tyrion would believe Jaime because of that love, and he was right:

His thoughts turned to Tysha, who had so briefly been his lady wife. It was Jaime, he thought, despairing. He was my own blood, my big strong brother. When I was small he brought me toys, barrel hoops and blocks and a carved wooden lion. He gave me my first pony and taught me how to ride him. When he said that he had bought you for me, I never doubted him. Why would I? He was Jaime, and you were just some girl who'd played a part. I had feared it from the start, from the moment you first smiled at me and let me touch your hand. My own father could not love me. Why would you if not for gold? (ADWD, Tyrion V)

Tywin weaponized Jaime's love for Tyrion and Tyrion's trust in Jaime in order to manipulate both brothers, and also as a way to sour their pure relationship. There's no way Tywin ever approved of Tyrion and Jaime's strong, loving, positive bond; it "distracts" Jaime from his duty to House Lannister, as well as—in Tywin's eyes, I believe—insults both Tywin and Joanna, for their strong, golden, beautiful, able bodied, perfect heir to love the twisted creature that murdered his mother and brought shame upon their House with his birth. Also, Jaime's love brings Tyrion happiness, makes him feel human and equal, and when has Tywin ever wanted that? For Tywin, having Jaime contribute in the destruction of Tyrion and Tysha's marriage killed two birds with one stone; it played a part in Tyrion's humiliation and abuse, but also puts a damper on Tyrion and Jaime's bond, even if only on Jaime's end, because while Tyrion was in the dark, Jaime would know the truth.

And the truth does haunt Jaime:

“ . . . I will say, I think it passing odd that I am loved by one for a kindness I never did, and reviled by so many for my finest act.” (ACOK, Catelyn VII)

. . . And Tyrion, his little brother, who loved him for a lie. (ASOS, Jaime IV)

I loved Tyrion. I was good to him. Well, but for that one time . . . (ASOS, Jaime VII) 

Yet he only confesses the truth to Tyrion when he knows that, as Tyrion is a fugitive, they will never see each other again anyway, so the loss of Tyrion was going to happen regardless of whether the confession was given. It’s selfish, but ultimately, I think, is because Jaime didn’t want to lose Tyrion, one of the two people in his life that makes him want to keep living it, post Rebellion. Even still, this truth was bred by their father, and started the rift. 

The rift has traumatized both brothers, and caused them anguish:

Varys had saved him from a headsman's sword, but only because Jaime had compelled him. Jaime … no, better not to think of Jaime. (ADWD, Tyrion I) That night Tyrion Lannister dreamed of a battle that turned the hills of Westeros as red as blood. . . . In the dream he had two heads, both noseless. His father led the enemy, so he slew him once again. Then he killed his brother, Jaime, hacking at his face until it was a red ruin, laughing every time he struck a blow. Only when the fight was finished did he realize that his second head was weeping. (ADWD, Tyrion II) Tyrion would like this one. They could talk from dusk to dawn, arguing about books. For a moment his bitterness toward his brother was forgotten, until he remembered what the Imp had done. (ADWD, Jaime I) "He was not your father." You did not kill him. I did. Tyrion may have loosed the crossbow bolt that slew him, but I loosed Tyrion. "Leave me." (AFFC, Jaime I) I should tell Cersei the truth, admit that it was me who freed our little brother from his cell. The truth had worked so splendidly with Tyrion, after all. I killed your vile son, and now I'm off to kill your father too. Jaime could hear the Imp laughing in the gloom. He turned his head to look, but the sound was only his own laughter coming back at him. He closed his eyes, and just as quickly snapped them open. I must not sleep. If he slept, he might dream. Oh, how Tyrion was sniggering. . . . (AFFC, Jaime I) I was wrong about Tyrion, why not about Cersei? (AFFC, Jaime II)

They’ve broken each other’s hearts, and it haunts them. 

Tywin died before knowing his actions caused a rift between the brothers, however, and that rift won't last long. Even shortly afterward, Jaime’s need to protect Tyrion showed itself, even in a dark way:

[Tyrion] never said he meant to kill our father. If he had, I would have stopped him. Then I would be the kinslayer, not him. (AFFC, Jaime I)

At first glance, this line might simply convey that Jaime would have killed Tyrion to protect Tywin. Upon further reflection of Jaime’s character, it becomes deeper. For one, I find it hard to believe that, if it came to life or death, Jaime would choose his father over his brother; he loves Tyrion more, and, as his big brother, feels a strong responsibility to protect him. 

We can infer this from the text. Jaime seems to put his love for his family in a hierarchy:

Jaime sat against the bole of an oak and wondered what Cersei and Tyrion were doing just now. (ASOS, Jaime II)

He could not die. Cersei was waiting for him. She would have need of him. And Tyrion, his little brother, who loved him for a lie. 

Live, he told himself . . . live for Cersei, live for Tyrion. (ASOS, Jaime IV)

He would see Cersei soon, and Tyrion, and their father. (ASOS, Jaime VII)

Cersei always comes first in Jaime’s mind—then Tyrion, then Tywin. 

This quote makes this undeniable and the most glaring:

"I've always loved my sister, and you owe me two answers. Do all my kin still live?"

"Ser Stafford Lannister was slain at Oxcross, I am told."

Jaime was unmoved. "Uncle Dolt, my sister called him. It's Cersei and Tyrion who concern me. As well as my lord father." (ACOK, Catelyn VII)

When asking about his family’s safety, Jaime asks about Cersei, then Tyrion . . . and Tywin, as well. As well. Like an afterthought, or something he threw in merely out of obligation. When listing his family’s place in Jaime’s heart, Tywin Lannister is a distant third. Tyrion is second, nearly as equal as Cersei (and in some cases, is favored over Cersei, depending on what Cersei is asking for, such as when Jaime refused to kill Tyrion for her). It’s highly unlikely Jaime would ever choose Tywin over Tyrion, in most circumstances.

This is why I believe that, if Jaime knew Tyrion was going to kill Tywin, he would have killed Tyrion to stop him—not to protect Tywin, but to protect Tyrion, as odd as that sounds. 

In Westerosi culture, kinslaying is the most heinous taboo, just as unforgivable as breaking guest right, if not worse. Any who commits the taboo will be shunned and cursed for eternity, by both the gods and their human peers. 

Jaime believes in this taboo, and thinks it’s worse than him breaking his sacred vow by killing Aerys:

"He killed him, Jaime. Just as he'd warned me. One day when I thought myself safe and happy he would turn my joy to ashes in my mouth, he said."

"Tyrion said that?" Jaime had not wanted to believe it. Kinslaying was worse than kingslaying, in the eyes of gods and men. (ASOS, Jaime VII)

If Jaime thinks kinslaying is worse than kingslaying, that means he believes living with such a title is even worse than living with his own status as a social pariah and sinner—a status that has caused him immense trauma and pain. 

Jaime would not let his little brother be subjected to such a fate. He has protected Tyrion from Tywin, Cersei and Tysha (when he believed Tysha to be a threat.) If he would do that, he would also protect Tyrion from himself. He would take on the burden of being a kinslayer himself to protect Tyrion from becoming one, even if it meant killing him. This ties back to the neutrality of Jaime’s love; he will do anything for it, anything to protect his loved ones. And in Jaime’s eyes—as well as his culture’s—it may be better to be dead than to live as an accursed kinslayer. Better for his brother to die in the light than to live going down a path that he perceives as even more terrible, darker, and irreversible than his own. 

It’s a disturbing thought, and twisted with as much resentment as love. But it shows that Tywin’s toxicity could never stop Jaime’s protectiveness of his brother completely. 

And ironically, the fact that Jaime would kill Tyrion to save Tywin not for Tywin’s sake, not to preserve the honor and stability of House Lannister as Tywin would demand of him, but to protect his dwarf brother from a traumatic, dark path—to express his love and devotion to his brother that is a stain upon their House—is in such defiance of Tywin’s toxicity and abusive parenting in the most Lannister way possible that it’s strangely fitting. Yet again, Jaime and Tyrion’s bond rises above. 

In a lighter defiance, Jaime’s darker feelings toward Tyrion lessen as time goes on, and he begins to think of him fondly again: 

Jaime heard them laughing. There was a time, not long ago, when he might have been out making snowballs with the best of them, to fling at Tyrion when he waddled by, or slip down the back of Cersei's gown. (AFFC, Jaime VII) Jaime thought back on the head he'd given to Pia. He could almost hear his little brother chuckle. Whatever became of giving women flowers? Tyrion might have asked. (AFFC, Jaime IV)

In turn, Tyrion, while enraged and hurt by Jaime, and claiming to want to murder him . . .

Tyrion pictured how his sister's head might look up there, with tar in her golden hair and flies buzzing in and out of her mouth. Yes, and Jaime must have the spike beside her, he decided. No one must ever come between my brother and my sister. (ADWD, Tyrion I)

“. . . Jaime and Cersei are mine to kill." (ADWD, Tyrion I)

. . . can’t help but admit to himself that he misses him:

Kem liked that. "Singer's stew. I'll ask for that next time I get back to Flea Bottom. What do you miss, Halfman?" Jaime, thought Tyrion. Shae. Tysha. My wife, I miss my wife, the wife I hardly knew. (ADWD, Tyrion XII)

Love is a vital part of both brothers' stories—what they will do for love, who they are with and without it, how having it and being denied it has shaped them. Their love for each other is a part of that. It's healthy, it's unbreakable, it's one of the few good things that has come from their family, one of the only stable and normal relationships in House Lannister, and that's beyond essential, for both of them.

Because Jaime and Tyrion—Handless and Noseless, the Lannister boys!—both need each other, and love each other so much. They are hurt by each other currently, but try as they might, they can’t stop their love from shining through that hurt, through that toxicity, because their love was born in a toxic family and world, but always has and always will defy it.

[steveyockey]

While I agree with what you say about Dean and people cosplaying as his character in universe the first couple was most likely cause they are a couple irl and decided to dress up as him and Sam - the siblings of the books (whoever wrote this in the ep I wanna study you) like I would have gotten some whiplash at that as well ngl.

so part of this has a very easy answer

as for the rest of it, let’s go. first things first, I don’t think demian and barnes are cosplaying wincests. you didn’t actually suggest this in the ask, but a lot of people seem to go off this assumption and I really don’t think it holds water. if anything, demian and barnes are the fans we see most devoted to the reality of the show -- they are not interpreting it, they are playing it straight (“straight”). it is all deeply character based whatwouldthewinchestersdo. this actually (I don’t think eric even thought this deeply about it) recreates a really interesting divide assumed in fandom spaces with a popular m/m pairing, that between straight women and mlm themselves. you see this invoked in the brennan piece as it is assumed that the people forcing the issue (the issue being destiel) are straight women trying to truss up their horniness as progressive politics while gay and bi men are assumed as their righteous adversaries, implicitly defending the canonical value of the text. while this dichotomy can be read into becky vs demian and barnes, it’s interesting that kripke and co even presented the idea that they had gay fans at all back in season 5. and they only really do because demian and barnes aren’t even really gay fans, their sexuality is just a bit for dean to gag at after they’ve already been read as ugly losers with no lives outside fandom. the gay reveal isn’t about representation, it’s about undercutting the progress made throughout the episode to give even a trace of humanity or heroism to a couple just trying to have a nice weekend. yes, it coincides with them being dressed as the brothers, which coincides with a wincest reading of the show, but again. that’s not demian and barnes’s reading. that’s a fan reading kripke himself already reproduced within his own text. so unfortunately, while I think you have a point, I think it’s less clear than “dean is reacting because of the incestuous implications of what demian and barnes are doing” and more “the incestuous implications hang over all gay fans of the show whether they are invested in, or even aware of, that aspect or not” and even, a bridge farther “the potentially incestuous implications of sam and dean’s relationship hang over dean’s understanding of his own sexuality.” and all this discussion precludes the existence of wlw fans, which we can agree make up a significant portion of m/m pairing/related fandom communities, but of course kripke can’t confront the idea that there are women who are taking a sledgehammer to his work for reasons that aren’t about their own psychosexual perversion and hetero desire. so instead we get two gay men bearing the brunt of a joke that works to collapse all supernatural fans into one contemptible mass, because being gay in the vicinity of supernatural is basically advocating for incest in your real life. also, even given all this, I don’t think sam would take the bait. it needs to be dean here