#one-sided war

[jedi-starbird]

'Desert hermit Ben Kenobi develops a reputation as a crazy wizard because he keeps talking to thin air.'

No. This is Tatooine, talking to yourself is hardly the weirdest thing they've seen. Ben Kenobi, however, keeps having full on fucking screaming rows with thin air and seemingly gets replies back, which is decidedly a step up.

(They've managed to piece together that a major point of contention is the acquisition and raising of a child? Clearly Ben is a wizard that had a bitter divorce with a desert spirit and is working through a custody dispute)

[skottsalva]

so the hundred line demo was really good

[poorly-drawn-mdzs]

Sunrise, Parabellum.

[First] Prev <–-> Next

[inky-axolotl]

Decided to redraw that one Obi Wan drawing I did- *checks time* 4 years ago! Happy to say I’ve grown a bit in the past 4 years art wise.

(2020 one here)

[emily-escott]

Clumsy, random, uncivilized

Effective, concise, sufficient

[varpusvaras]

I thought about how the recent depiction of Jason and his dynamic with the Batfam and especially Bruce really, really is accidentally written to be an uncomfortably realistic depiction of an abusive relationship, and then I thought about it more and realised that if Jason ever realised that and said it out loud, others would have a really hard time believing him.

Of course others would believe that Batman has done those things, but Jason is a big and strong adult man who has done/does crimes. Realistically people would take one look at him and go really? you? why don't you just hit back? and besides, don't you kinda deserve it? surely it is your fault somehow, since you are not a good person.

And this is even how the narrative presents the whole thing, since Bruce himself told Jason to his face that he deserves to be beaten in order to stay in line, and Jason fucking agreed to that. And I just. I don't like that for how casually it all justifies a thing that is an actual real-life problem.

[mroddmod]

little scrapped comic bc it felt a bit ooc to me in hindsight

[freefallintothevoid]

You know the thing where Gotham has its own timezone except that it's slang for the termporal fuckery caused by the many many layers of curses embedded into the city?

Yeah that, but I like to think Central City has a similar problem. The amount of speed speedforce used by the like 3+ speedsters living there at any given moment sits in the air around the city to the point where it begins to effect how time passes. The speedsters don't age faster than normal people thanks to whatever speedforce based logic is applied, but eventually there's so much ambient speedforce floating around in Central that the entire city gets affected.

As a result the Bat family and the Flash family have known each other existed since the 40s/50s even if it took them a couple decades to actually meet

[room217prayer]

Something to wonder about:

Amarantha, planning and inviting all the High Lords and their Courts to her party, to show them she has changed and wants to mend things with them. Even though she has been for centuries an enemy/evil for all of Prythian to see.

Rhysand, asking for a High Lords meeting, to form an alliance against Hybern and to show them that he's an ally, not an enemy. That he has never been one. He had only been "playing a role/wearing a mask". Even though he had been evil and horrible for more than 500th years, for all Prythian to see.

Tamlin, watching them both from the sidelines, being the only one who warned the High Lords - at both these instances - to not trust Amarantha/Rhysand, only to not be listened.

We know how it ended with Amarantha, I wonder how things will go with Rhysand... Who now is whispered to become the High King of Prythian... Sorry, what did Amarantha declare herself as, after that party? MHM.

[cipherixx]

GIRL HELP HELLPPPP IM SO NORMAL ABT THIS ORIGIN STORYYYY

[thepromisedbride]

the fact that the sequel trilogy could have perfectly set up a three v three scenario where the main trio could have each taken down their counterparts (poe against hux, finn against phasma, rey against ren) before they defeated snoke together so you could explore their characters and pasts and show the differences between the dark and light side of the force. and not only did they not do that but they basically screwed over the trio as a concept entirely

[cosmotellurias]

"Percy is the one holding Annabeth back" this, "Annabeth is the one controlling Percy" that, you know who actually make sure these guys don't do anything stupid? GROVER UNDERWOOD. Put some respect in his name. Percy and Annabeth are each other's enablers 😭

[synchodai]

HBO's Continued Insistence on Dumbing Down Westerosi Politics

So there have been countless thinkpieces already on how GOT simplified the feudalist politics of Westeros (by giving a lowborn sellsword lordship over The Reach, by having no consequences for destroying the Sept of Baelor, etc.), but I haven't seen a lot of people talking about that for House of the Dragon.

The worst being that the show presupposes that Rhaenyra is the lawful heir when the books showed there are plenty of lawful arguments why she wouldn't be.

Mind you that I've been enjoying the show a lot so far. This is just to vent out my frustration with the writers' failure to fully engage with the values and protocols of the Middle Age-inspired setting. The show seems uninterested in laws of the Realm in a story ostensibly about politics, save for when they're using it as an excuse to amplify depictions of sex and violence.

Blacks vs Greens wasn't a matter of misunderstanding of who each side thought Viserys wanted on the throne. It was the Targaryens' belief of their absolute authority clashing with the Realm's established traditions. Everyone always knew who Viserys chose as heir. In Fire and Blood, Grand Maester Orwyle said as much when he was parleying with Rhaenyra on behalf of the Greens.

Rhaenyra heard his terms in stony silence, then asked Orwyle if he remembered her father, King Viserys. "Of course, Your Grace," the maester answered. "Perhaps you can tell us who he named as his heir and successor," the queen said, her crown upon her head. "You, Your Grace," Orwyle replied. And Rhaenyra nodded and said, "With your own tongue you admit I am your lawful queen. Why do you serve my half-brother, the pretender?" Munkun tells us that Orwyle gave a long and erudite reply, citing the Andal law and the Great Council of 101. Mushroom claims he stammered and voided his bladder. Whichever is true, his answer did not satisfy Princess Rhaenyra.

(For non-F&B readers: Munkun is the Grand Maester who served Aegon III, the king who came after this civil war. Munkun's book, The Dance of the Dragons, A True Telling, is one of Fire and Blood's source texts. Mushroom is the King Landing court jester from Viserys I to Aegon III's reign. One is a source written with academic rigor but is secondhand at best. The other is a firsthand eyewitness account but is from a literal fool who will take every chance to make things more scandalous and sexual to please the crowd.)

In House of the Dragon, they replaced Orwyle with Otto and Orwyle's discussion of legal precedent with Otto handing Rhaenyra a book page from Alicent. It's quite evident here that the writers, much like Mushroom, thought a discussion on the actual laws of the Realm were negligible in this story about a succession war.

Even Alicent made no pretense that Viserys chose Rhaenyra over her children and I have no idea why the HBO writers decided to make her mistakenly think otherwise. Maybe they thought a queen regent pushing her son to take the throne over another woman made her appear unsympathetic as a character, but if anything, this only makes show!Alicent less politically savvy and more delusional than her book counterpart, fully believing an addled king's vague muttering on his deathbed was sufficient grounds to change heirs last minute.

Book!Alicent following Andal laws instead of her husband's wishes makes sense given her Andal upbringing, her devotion to the Faith of the Seven which enforces said laws, and her desire to protect her children from Rhaenyra given that Rhaenyra has shown she's not above murdering family (see: Laenor).

In the books, there was a long discussion between the former king's council on who should succeed Viserys.

Here are the arguments for Rhaenyra:

Rhaenyra was older than her brothers and had more Targaryen blood

the late king had chosen her as his successor, that he had repeatedly refused to alter the succession despite the pleadings of Queen Alicent and her greens

hundreds of lords and landed knights had done obeisance to the princess in 105 AC, and sworn solemn oaths to defend her rights.

Here are the arguments for Aegon II:

many of the lords who had sworn to defend the succession of Princess Rhaenyra were long dead [...]

Ironrod, the master of laws, cited the Great Council of 101 and the Old King’s choice of Baelon rather than Rhaenys in 92

the hallowed Andal tradition wherein the rights of a trueborn son always came before the rights of a mere daughter

Ser Otto reminded them that Rhaenyra’s husband was none other than Prince Daemon, and “we all know that one’s nature. Make no mistake, should Rhaenyra ever sit the Iron Throne, it will be Lord Flea Bottom who rules us, a king consort as cruel and unforgiving as Maegor ever was [...]”

Should the princess reign [...] Jacaerys Velaryon would rule after her. “Seven save this realm if we seat a bastard on the Iron Throne.”

Once again, the show chose to cut out this long political discussion. Instead, the council had already made up their mind and decided to stage a coup (when in their perspectives from the books, it would definitely not be a coup).

For all their marketing how two sides are equally grey, HotD is actively delegitimizing Aegon II. The strongest argument for him is how his claim follows the laws of the Realm, but the show doesn't seem to care about the laws of the Realm or the political need to maintain a more predictable/tested transfer of power.

Instead, the show focuses on Viserys's relationship with his daughter and the mysticism of the Targaryen bloodline. In doing so, they emphasize Rhaenyra's strongest arguments for succession — that she's more of a Targaryen than her half-brother and that her father prefered her.

And what for? Because in our modern-day, we don't have male-prefered inheritance and people can only imagine misogyny as the only injustice here? What about the injustice of a monarch exercising absolute control, thinking that his "superior" heritage makes him above the established laws of the native people?

This is not to say Aegon II is unquestionably the heir. But this is to say that the show removed the political nuance of why people are questioning in the first place. Precedence isn't the end-all-be-all of succession, but neither is "because daddy said so".

[laughhardrunfastbekindsblog]

Okay, I've seen this floating around recently -

and I have to give my two cents:

No, Palpatine was NOT right.

The Force comprises BOTH light and dark, life and death, creation and destruction. It keeps itself in balance.

This is distinct from the "Light Side" and "Dark Side" in reference to what the Jedi and Sith practice.

(I will also note that neither the original trilogy nor the prequels ever mention a "Light Side." Only the Force and the Dark Side are named. This is important when considering the following.)

The Jedi are consistently shown to strive to act according to what the Force wills, especially as they wield the Force. We see they don't seek destruction, and they defend life, but they also accept losses - including death - as part of the natural order of things. They strive to act in a state of calm and peace to allow the will of the Force to take shape. In this sense, the Jedi understand the literal "dark side of the Force" much better than the Sith do, because they understand (or at least accept) the roles darkness and death and loss and change play in the grand scheme of things as the Force keeps itself in balance. They don't add to the darkness, because they don't need to. We say they act with the "Light Side," but really they act with the Force.

"I am one with the Force, and the Force is with me."

The Sith, on the other hand, act on the named "Dark Side" by relying on negative emotions - fear, anger, hate - to wrest the Force out of its natural flow and exert their own control rather than allowing the Force to do as it will. Paradoxically, they contribute to death and darkness outside of any balanced parameters in an effort to avoid death/loss for themselves. They have no interest in studying or understanding the "Light Side," because they don't care what the Force wants - they only care about what THEY want and they're going to wield the Force in unnatural ways to achieve it.

So, in summation: no, the main villain of the franchise is NOT right, he's being manipulative and evil as usual, and he doesn't truly understand the Force beyond how to corrupt it to his own benefit so we shouldn't be taking advice from him.

[aspiring-spellcaster]

“Why do you love people who can only go so far? Who can’t go as deep as you can.”

[sgt-colbert-is-wings-level]

SSgt. Malarkey, a second patrol has hit the platoon