#psychoanalyzing fictional characters is good or bad

[wasteland-wrecker]

ily..... sorry if you've ever answered this but have you ever drawn modern au gage and toby? or do you have hcs?

Hey there! <3

I’m not a big au fan but… here we go! ✨

Thank you for asking, I have this big headcanon:

Gage is not so good in bed. He is probably a virgin, let me explain you why.

🔞🔞🔞

From what we know about his past and the way he talks I'm pretty sure he's never had s3x with anyone or at least no long-term, positive experience.

Lines like "…you wouldn’t want nothin to do with me, not with the fucked up life I’ve had” denotes he is AWARE of the cruelty of the world he lives in. He has seen shit his whole life. I don’t think he had the time to even think about s3x.

Or “I ain’t never done anything like this. Ain’t sure it’d work, you know?”

When you ask him about your relationship he says “… I don’t like talking about feelings and shit. We’re… we’re great, you know that”. Zero experience, come on.

This means he gets embarrassed and that he’s worried about other people’s opinions (which is quite strange for a wastelander and a raider) one of his lines is like “if I die killed by a bug, tell everyone I accidentally stomped on my gun and killed myself”. (Yeah, who cares???)

And, speaking of raiders, he’s lived his whole life as one of them and when he talks to you (a complete stranger!!) in private he calls them “fucking raiders” (you okay man?! Need to talk or something?!).

It seems clear that none of these raiders have ever made its way into his sensitive little heart. He’s faking, pretending to be something he’s truly not.

And I don’t think he’s ever had anything to do with settlers. I can’t even imagine him r4ping someone, from that point of view he has a strong integrity (at most he’ll piss on your corpse ✨)

No one has ever made him feel safe, he says that to you when he opens up. Gage must completely trust his partner to have s3x with him/her/them. He must be sure he won’t be betrayed or killed.

And his past makes it clear that he no longer trusts anyone, apart from himself.

I might also add that the fact that he doesn't take baths indicates a sort of disinterest in the subject.

Gage often complains during trips and it means that he worries about stuff (like rads, chems, alcohol, bad smells - yeah he does I can prove it).

Do you think someone so attentive to what surrounds him and the consequences of his actions wouldn’t care about sexual diseases and sleeping with just anyone? I’m sorry but I don't see it.

He surely m4sturbates often, I can agree with that. He has very indecent thoughts as well and he’s horny af. He probably likes it rough, yes. (He loves to read erotic books OF THIS I’M SURE 10000%) But don't come and tell me that he is a S3x Lord Master or something because I have an hard time believing that (surely with a good experience he can become one, but not when you first know him).

Last, but not least, let’s not forget the fact that his name’s GAGE and he wears a fuckin CAGE all the time (to keep people away from him). The end.

Alright uh, my hand slipped on this hc lol, let me know if you want more anon and I’ll answer you in another post 😭 (shorter I promise) or you can read this post

[sockatoothewafflebird]

i keep scrolling through the arcane tag and at least 40% of it is about caitlyn kiramman's warmongering dictator arc. apologies to my followers for being so obsessed with her but i have to add more fuel to the fire that is caitlyn character analyses. please hear me because only one of my caitlyn posts gets attention i want it to be this one.

i personally see caitlyn's character in season 2 as:

a painfully realistic portrayal of how quickly the privileged can go off their rockers at the lower class when they do literally anything wrong. "It's so easy to hate them."

a woman in mourning with no outlet for her grief and anger, scraping at the walls for any semblance of revenge she can get her hands on.

a puppet of the leaders that will use her for their own gain, which will ultimately only make the corruption and prejudice in the system worse and worse. (ambessa.... when i catch you ambessa...)

all of these things can coexist. and they do. arcane is so fucking good at making complex, nuanced, morally-grey characters, and caitlyn is no different.

(putting the rest under the cut bc this got LONG... sorry💀)

something about when you spend your life as a part of the upper class, equality feels like oppression. something about the upper class lashes out when the lower class does nothing but defend themselves, because both feel threatened by the other, but only the lower class is justified in that. something about CAITLYN IS A GASLIGHT-GATEKEEP-GIRLBOSS AND I DO NOT CONDONE HER ACTIONS!!! i stand with my cancelled queen in the sense that i just want to know if she pulls out a ukulele or reciepts!

the worst part about being a caitlyn fan is that she's gonna get worse before she gets better. that's a plain and simple fact. she is going to hurt people, she is going to kill people, she is going to fuck things up; whether it be directly or indirectly, by her own hand or through the puppeteering of ambessa. probably both.

she is going to do horrible things, whether we like it or not. she already has, look at the ventilation systems and how she exploited the grey. she'll only truly be able to realize she's wrong if she goes down to zaun and sees the damage she's done for herself, thinks long and hard about what she's fighting for. she's lost her way and she's gonna have to crawl through the trenches to find it again.

she's using and abusing her power because of things she shouldn't be using as excuses. jinx killed her mother; the attacks at the memorial service; except those don't justify her actions. explains them, maybe. but she's turning into the exact kind of person you'd expect someone of her status to become. someone with power to her name, using it against those below her because she thinks it's justified, with no one bold enough to stop her.

she's going down a dark path and i am HERE to see how she fixes her mistakes in the end... if she even does. i'm excited to see what they do with her. will vi forgive her? will anyone?

that's for the writers to decide. i have faith that they'll execute it well no matter which way it goes. flawed, yes, as all things are, but they will get this right. if they don't i'm gonna be on a watchlist by the end of the month.

oh, caitlyn kiramman, gaslighting-gatekeeping-girlbossing in act 2. what a piece of work. and i'm just a down-bad lesbian that likes psychoanalyzing fictional lesbians. like... have you seen that woman???? she's too good to not put under a microscope. it's like the writers were baiting me specifically.

if anyone has any theories btw, caitlyn related or not, lemme hear them because i will listen. i will read every essay about this show i come across if it costs me my life 🫡

[twistedtummies2]

Gathering of the Greatest Gumshoes - Number 14

Welcome to A Gathering of the Greatest Gumshoes! During this month-long event, I’ll be counting my Top 31 Favorite Fictional Detectives, from movies, television, literature, video games, and more!

SLEUTH-OF-THE-DAY’S QUOTE: “You attacked reason. It’s bad theology.”

Number 14 is…Father Brown.

Originally created by author G.K. Chesterton, Father Brown is one of the most famous detectives in English literature. Having said that, I must immediately make a confession: I’m not THAT well-versed (perhaps surprisingly) with the original “Father Brown” short stories Chesterton wrote. I’ve read some of them; specifically, I’ve now read all the ones collected in the book “The Innocence of Father Brown.” (My favorite is “The Invisible Man,” which, for the record, has absolutely nothing to do with anyone named Griffin). However, beyond that, I’m not especially familiar with the original writing. I also have not seen either of the two English-language film versions I know about (one played by Walter Connolly, another by Alec Guinness), both of which were based on the story “The Blue Cross.” And I should also immediately state that I have seen only one episode of the TV series starring Kenneth More from the 1970s, which I know has been highly lauded in years since.

So…since it seems like I am unfamiliar with nearly EVERYTHING that has brought this character into popular culture…how DO I know Father Brown, and why is he so high on the list? Well, because there is one version of the character and his universe that I am VERY familiar with: the most recent TV series adaptation of the stories, which began in 2013 and is still going strong today (with a new season coming this year). This show, simply and appropriately titled “Father Brown,” stars Mark Williams (whom many may recognize for playing Mr. Weasley in the Harry Potter films). While it frequently changes a LOT from the original Chesterton stories, the show is still EXTREMELY good. In my opinion, it modernizes the stories in a way that is pretty decently handled, so that even if you haven’t read the originals, you can still get a lot out of what’s being given to you. The spirit of Chesterton’s work is still intact. Much of what I say here will be informed by Williams’ portrayal of the character, which is why I wanted to make all this clear right off the bat.

Father Brown is an example of what might be called “the busybody detective,” or even more appropriately “the accidental detective.” What I mean by this is that he’s not in any way officially tied to the police; in fact, the police frequently see him as a nuisance, who gets in the way of their work and often makes them look like fools. He also never makes a career or a proper hobby out of his detective work. Being a detective just…kind of happens to him. Father Brown, on the surface, is a simple and humble local priest; a God-fearing, God-loving man of the cloth who is charitable, good-hearted, and at times seems sort of fumbling and shambolic. He’s not someone, therefore, you’d expect would make a great sleuth.

A great sleuth, of course, is exactly what this mild-mannered Catholic priest is. Father Brown’s rather simple demeanor belies a steely will, an even more steely faith, and a very cunning and alert mind. He typically ends up playing detective not so much out of a desire to one-up the police or some obsessive desire, but simply because he notices something amiss and begins to question why that is. His greatest assets as a sleuth can be summed up as two simple attributes: common sense, and, above all, human empathy. Father Brown doesn’t necessarily look for fingerprints or psychoanalyze criminals like a forensic profiler, but simply notices things that don’t make sense and then tries to make sense of them. He uses his understanding of people’s personalities, looks at their character traits and ideals, and uses them to his advantage; if he feels it isn’t in someone’s nature to shoot in cold blood, he follows his instinct, and he’s usually proven correct. If he sees someone showing some weakness or vulnerability, he latches onto that to try and sway them. He tries to redeem his enemies more often than he tries to ruin them. Contrariwise, this man also knows when NOT to trust people. While he’s noble and forgiving, Father Brown isn’t a pushover. In fact, the Williams version is revealed to be a war veteran; he’s seen some action (and horror) in his lifetime. This, combined with his devotion to the confessional booth, means that he knows very well that people are not perfect. With that said, despite being a religious soul, he isn’t superstitious, and tries to be tolerant of others with different beliefs. In short, Father Brown seems to understand that good people are good people, and tries to find the good in everyone, even those he seeks to defeat. Whether you’re spiritual or not, he’s not only a good detective, but arguably a good role model: I think a lot of us wish we had a Father Brown in our lives.

Tomorrow, the countdown continues with Number 13!

CLUE: “Are you with me? You might even be way ahead of me.”

[literaila]

₊✩‧₊˚ the origin (get to know me) ‧₊˚✩‧₊

₊✩‧ basics ₊˚✩‧

‧✩ i'm verity, 18, bi, leo, she/they pronouns

‧✩ currently doing: nothing

‧✩ huge introvert, small loser, very dry (dryer than the one in my basement), also very humorous (argue with a wall)

‧✩ likes: my dog foggy, cats, the color green, psychoanalyzing fictional characters, writing melodrama, one direction, hozier, going to costco, baking, cooking, anime edits, impressing people with my obvious talent, candles, coloring, wearing lotion, doing my nails

‧✩ dislikes: coleslaw, mean people, when people interrupt my quiet time, getting gas, bad movies (i watch them anyway though), when something sticky gets on the floor, and coleslaw

‧✩ random facts: type one diabetic, fantastic tonal memory, i have three brothers, i own three copies of twilight, i love ice cream cake

₊✩‧ favorites ₊˚✩‧

‧✩ thing: foggy (my dog again)

‧✩ movies: cars, tick tick boom, set it up, jjk 0, hacksaw ridge, barbie princess charm school, thor ragnarok, twilight

‧✩ shows: new girl, criminal minds, greys anatomy, how to get away with murder, master kitchen, the queens gambit, psych, daredevil, jessica jones, wandavision, good luck charlie, bluey, the night manager

‧✩ books: fangirl, scythe, twilight, percy jackson, the way i used to be, lessons in chemistry, the song of achilles, six of crows, my life next door, the cruel prince, shatter me

‧✩ anime: jjk, mha, aot, chainsaw man, cherry magic, a sign of affection, demon slayer, bungo stray dogs, death note, solo leveling

‧✩ songs: brutus, call your mom, butchered tongue, unknown, from eden, only angel, epic III, little big boy, my love is sick

‧✩ other: soup, blankets, having medical insurance, the interview where harry mocks niall saying "no i don't," my best friend i guess (bob), my grandma, matt murdock

[vital-information]

One reading for Silence of the Lambs (1991) exists that portrays exactly what trans, gay, and queer rights organizations have been protesting about it since before it even premiered—a narrative caricature that pathologizes and demonizes queerness in the profiling and the depiction of the antagonist, Buffalo Bill.

But, if not necessarily a closer reading, at least an alternative reading, offers a deeply queer film, as writer Aja Romano describes wonderfully in their complicated history piece for Vox on occasion of the film’s 30th anniversary, and, if one wanted to go farther, a symbolic coming out narrative through the psychological horror and true crime genres. As Romano points out, Buffalo Bill is actually a bogeyman of queer identity in the film: “Silence of the Lambs explicitly tries to distance Buffalo Bill’s behavior from transgender identity. Lecter observes that Bill isn’t transgender, and Starling reminds the audience that there’s no link between transgender identity and violence. The film overtly tries to separate its villain from the trans community — in stark contrast to many of its predecessors in the horror genre.” This villain, within a psychological analysis, is not a representation of queerness but a representation of society’s paranoia towards queerness that Clarice has to identify and face for herself.

That Clarice Starling is played by iconic wlw, Jodie Foster, whose sexuality was perhaps not public at the time but was pretty well established subtext for a portion of her audience and was known within her Hollywood circles, is a good jumping off point to see this arc of queer identification. The film’s oft-cited feminist portrayal of a woman in a masculine work environment and as a capable protagonist does double duty to establish Starling’s character (whether played by Foster or not) as transgressing gender roles that can align her with a kind of queerness. Then, there’s Hannibal Lector, who, more than Buffalo Bill, seems to embody certain gay stereotypes as a campy, penetrating aesthete, sibilant s’s and all, literally trapped within a glass cell. It’s not a stretch to see the cell as a closet. And the camera work that places Starling behind the glass wall as often as Lector as they attempt to psychoanalyze one another to offer help and a form of liberation emboldens a parallel between them.

True crime and psychological horror since Silence of the Lambs often directs the protagonist to accept the murderous darkness within themselves. Bad faith readings point to understanding this inclination as a representation of how evil is a contagion or corrupting force that individuals are helpless to avoid if they pursue their curiosity in it even under the best intentions. However, that’s a pretty literal interpretation of the murder in these fictional stories. I want to argue that the protagonist’s eventual turn to obsession and murder, even if in self-defense, operates similarly to the marriage plot in the romance genre. The main character is forced to become aligned with characteristics they had formerly seen as impossible for them to embody. The bullet or knife is a means of simultaneously overcoming their fears around this part of themselves and cathartically entering into an embodiment of it. When a character like Will in Hannibal or Eve in Killing Eve or Clarice Starling eventually find themselves cut adrift from their governmental agencies and/or forced to kill on their own, they are narratively freed from the rigid constraints of societal rules and expectations.

Fictional killing by a protagonist is not advocating for a literal replication of that action. It’s about their ability, alongside the audience’s, to find peace, resolution, and empathy for ourselves and others. Clarice confronts the false specter of homosexuality and claims a more holistic truth about her own desires that quiets the screaming lambs in her mind while Lecter escapes the cages imposed on him so that he can have his old friend for dinner. That these are revealed darkly is a feature of the genre and less a commentary on the queer subtexts. The trio of Buffalo Bill, Hannibal Lecter, and, at their fulcrum, Clarice Starling inflect the film with a profusion of queerness that, going beyond a simple look at how realistically the film portrays transness or criminal profiling, invites instead an interpretation that provides the opportunity for one to emotionally experience its dynamic queer catharsis.

[zeroothoughts]

My 2 cents on peoples thoughts on Alastor as a character

🚨controversial opinions below, just my opinion🚨

I am losing my mind at how many people(listen guys opinions are valid) think things about the show but they take it as gospel and when someone says “hey that’s not true this is actually how it is” and they don’t listen to you???

No Alastor is not a “parental” figure to the rest of the group (he was manipulating Charlie for his own personal reasons).

NO. Alastor does not have all the potential in the world to be redeemed. I have seen people depicting him as someone who now believes he can be saved, or rather someone who has wanted to be good since life, this isn’t the case. Some people are just bad people, he has many deals like husker for example, and only treats them halfway decently when he needs something from them(FIGHT.ME.)

He was suspected to be a murderer in life, and is clearly very narcissistic and held in high regard of himself. At the smallest mention of him not being all powerful or being under someone else’s control, he loses his shit. We have SEEN this happen. TWICE. He stated in the finale whilst singing that his deal is preventing him from pulling all the strings and having power over everyone.

I’m really sick and tired of the new HH & HB fans meat riding their own opinions and refusing to accept truth from people who have psychoanalyzed this media and have waited YEARS. For any type of follow up.

I listen to a lot of opinions about how they died and how their life was before; honestly, it’s a very fun thing to theorize. But one person I know irl had thoughts about how Alastor was treated as a mixed-race creole man in the early 1900’s Louisiana. I admit, some of those things **MIGHT** have happened realistically. But some people have to realize it’s not okay to have headcanons about racial prejudice against fictional characters. Creating characters as a means to bring light to struggle on being in that criteria is a good conceptual idea to let these truths to be known. HOWEVER, coming up with new ways to harm someone based on race is not an okay thing to just throw out there, at least to me.

Some of their opinions were “The other kids would rub rocks on his skin to see if he would get lighter.”, and “he would get mud thrown on him to make him darker.” I had to stop it because I felt uncomfortable with this type of talk regarding a character whose personality and mannerisms intrigue me, because they were creating racial trauma that has not been previously stated.

I believe this is a pretty controversial take as there are people who believe in creating and consuming this media. But I needed to let off some steam on this topic.

Anything else I feel about Alastor is still just theories, so I won’t take them to the grave as I cannot know, for sure, if I am right. Although, If it is something anyone is willing to discuss with me I would be happy to do so.

[max1461]

w/r/t the fiction thing, first off I've never read a post about aesthetics that I have so viscerally disagreed with with every fiber of my being. while the other anon made a good point about how similar character and setting are I feel like the list is kind of an incoherent taxonomy because everything in it is kind of inseparable, "atmosphere" i.e the attitude of the writer to the subject(calling this tone) and the effect of stylistic features on the reader(calling this mood) aren't really something you can separate from character and even if they were they're very clearly different kinds of things, "atmosphere" seems more like it should hang over the other three as a culmination of how mood and tone work to realize character/settings/scenes, I also don't really even see how you could meaningfully hierarchize those three things, they're tools to be used

the goal of your taxonomy seems to be to kind of dehumanize fiction( this might just be bad psychoanalysis but im going off vibes) in a way wherein certain somewhat impersonal stylistic features are taken as more important but like even in works with similar depersonalized priorities fiction still necessarily is oriented around human concerns! it's about what it means to be human, I don't think a work of art or especially fiction can be good if it doesn't say something about this even if it eschews traditional characterization the use of setting is itself invariably characterized to reflect some kind of ineffable truth about being human, not about being a setting, regardless of what narrative construct the story is about is kind of irrelevant because whether it's a place/institution/character it occupies the same role in the recipe. the ability of a skilled writer to use a facsimile of an actual human is obviously useful for exploring humanness but I wouldn't say the paradigm you describe really exists that much outside of like surface level of internet discussions and I think the way you've compartmentalized aspects of narrative is kind of bizarre I am actually sorry if this comes across as snarky and mean but also I feel shaken to my core

In reference to this post.

w/r/t the fiction thing, first off I've never read a post about aesthetics that I have so viscerally disagreed with with every fiber of my being.

Yeah this is because my opinions are cool and countercultural. The mainstream just doesn't get it, man. I have the nose ring of media opinions.

while the other anon made a good point about how similar character and setting are I feel like the list is kind of an incoherent taxonomy because everything in it is kind of inseparable

Well sure maybe they're inseparable, but that doesn't mean the taxonomy is incoherent. Society is inseparable from individuals but we still recognize Thatcher's "there is no such thing as society" as being kind of a silly position.

Actually, looking back, if you read my post, the whole point I'm making is that character, setting, etc. go into constructing one another, they make each other. And I think characters are interesting mostly insofar as they make settings, and settings and scenes are interesting insofar as they produce a sort of gestalt. So I agree that they're inseparable, generally speaking, I just disagree with how people prioritize them, how people see what should serve what in a story.

the goal of your taxonomy seems to be to kind of dehumanize fiction( this might just be bad psychoanalysis but im going off vibes)

You're right, this is vibes based psychoanalysis. I think you are imagining me as some kind of crusading science guy or some such, same as the other anon. Maybe I'm wrong. But what this is really about, if we're psychoanalyzing, is that when I was a little kid I wanted to be an architect, and my favorite hobby was staring at the ceiling imagining it was the floor. I would do this for hours. Ceilings seem so much more interesting to traverse than floors. There are dips and bumps and weird shapes, and you have to climb to get through all the doors. And I loved climbing. Climb over this climb over that. You can climb through a setting. You can't climb through a character.

The rest of this post is I think aimed at a guy who's not me, I think lots of parts of it are not true anyway but I don't feel like debating them because they are aimed at some other guy. I think. Maybe I'm wrong.

[landofspaceandrainbows]

Buncha rough stuff ahead: Discussions of (oblique) racism, buncha violence, self injury, all of the above both fictional and real (mostly fictional). you have been warned. bunch of psychoanalyzing (tm) why people might like stuff. etc. Thinking of cross - posting this to DW.

A recurring anguish in certain circles of fantasy roleplaying involves the never-ending search for ethical, commendable, heroic murder. This often externalized as an issue of the murdered party, the one fantasized murderer ever the silent passive subject; a quest for an intrinsic quality of the murder victim that makes it A Good. This is phrased and re-phrased in variants of the same question: What would be an acceptable target for my character to kill in a dungeon?

you sit with a knife and a lighter besides you, the undersides of your forearms exposed.

a - (fictional) - being, an orc, a human, whatever, stumbles off the battlefield walks among his family and/or his people scarred and/or maimed. his sister averts her eyes and whimpers. what circumstances would make it ok or right for him to feel the touch of your blade, of your torch?

a bottle of alchohol.

someone opens their eyes in the aftermath of a battle, their mouth is dry, so dry, the sun hurts their eyes, they won't be able to work for their village, their hovel-like orc camp or whatever for the next few days.

a noose - afterwards mothers often scream and cry about their lost children.

if you pierce your ear cartilage, go on hormones, you know your mom and dad will cry again. you take a couple hours off work, or look into a video game. you're paid by the hour - one less meal bought for your friend.

you're sexually harassed by someone in your social justice activist group. do you leave?

does the same person always feel like an ally or an enemy all the time or does it shift?

"because, of course, the orcs have been successfully depersonized "

if you look up sterilization, and reproductive choice options, "their daughter" or "their son" must die, "their grandchild" not anymore.

if you want to take breaks - "their worker" must not be.

none of these were real people to begin with, i guess.

-

you call the hospital another time. if it mattered less you could catch some sleeping.

someone's hand grows cold and stiff in yours. you look around, something nudges at you, who you wouldn't do in to bring them back.

-

But why a whole race or species? - In these modern, enlightened times of everyone being a special, unique snowflake (which is true < 3) doesn't taking out one person mean taking out all of a unique kind? "if you save one person, it's as if you saved the whole world".

-

why might violence without consequences be escapist?

why might rape?

when you pick up the knife and bandages IRL, or a drink, there are questions being asked, but with live bullets.

in the dungeon, the questions are asked, and the bullets are blanks.

if it wasn't for the price being unacceptable IRL, would the cessation of pain be so bad? would your needs and/or wants be so bad? or too much?

-

"In the Great War we were all orcs." - Tolkien

"O, that this too too solid flesh would melt Thaw and resolve itself into a dew! Or that the Everlasting had not fix'd His canon 'gainst self-slaughter! O God! God!" - Hamlet by W. Shakespeare

"Prince Zam: "Are you going to say I imagined all my deaths by you?? Clownpierce: "No, I'm just going to heavily imply it." " - Lifesteal SMP

"Technoblade (r i p): "They say that in this world the only universal language is violence, and we've spoken that language, we've had that conversation in the pit. It's over, on to a new day." " - Dream SMP

[cyanidepixistix]

😇- What is the best quality this character shares with you?

Her protectiveness towards her people

😈- What is the worst quality this character shares with you?

*sighs* We're both sociopaths

👥- Which of your OCs' relationships (platonic or romantic) most resembles one of your own?

None, I'm too introverted to be as brave as her

❔- Which nominally "good" character do you like the least? (as a person)

I'm assuming you mean fiction in general, Dumbledore

❓- Which nominally "bad" character do you like the most? (as a person)

Loki

��- Which nominally "good" character do you enjoy writing the least?

I don't like writing good characters in general, I like characters that are bad or perceived as bad because the hurt is soooo good

❗- Which nominally "bad" character do you enjoy writing the most?

All of em

😄- Would you be good friends with this character?

Probably not, the teen angst would annoy the fuck out of me, as it already does bit it's logical for her personality soooooo

🥰- Would you date this character?

I would date any of my characters

🍕- What "favorites" does this character share with you? (Favorite food, color, weather, etc.)

The only thing we share is a favorite color, which is purple, because I enjoy the aesthetic

🎭- Are there any characters you as the author don't really understand? Why?

Hmmm.....unsure....most authors explain their characters well enough to give an understanding.

⚔️- Which character shows anger in the same way as you?

Saoirse has my anger issues, as did Valerian

���- Which character shows sadness in the same way as you?

Most of my characters have the same emotional range that I do, because it makes it easier for me to psychoanalyze them to make decisions. This also leads to some self introspection that I dont need sometimes

❤️- Which character shows care in the same way as you?

See above

🎉- Which character shows joy in the same way as you?

See above

💩- How many of your characters have self-esteem issues and are you aware that we all enjoy your presence on the hellsite?

Lol, again, see above

👁️- Is this character based off someone you know in real life? Who?

Not in real life, Saoirse is an amalgam of myself plus some other characters, mainly Mirko from MHA

🦴- How does this character process death?

Not very well. She was poorly socialized as a puppy and does not process things very well...

Authorial Psychoanalysis OC Asks

You read that painfully phrased title correctly, today we're going to ask about your OCs and use them to psychoanalyze you!

😇- What is the best quality this character shares with you?

😈- What is the worst quality this character shares with you?

👥- Which of your OCs' relationships (platonic or romantic) most resembles one of your own?

❔- Which nominally "good" character do you like the least? (as a person)

❓- Which nominally "bad" character do you like the most? (as a person)

❕- Which nominally "good" character do you enjoy writing the least?

❗- Which nominally "bad" character do you enjoy writing the most?

😄- Would you be good friends with this character?

🥰- Would you date this character?

🍕- What "favorites" does this character share with you? (Favorite food, color, weather, etc.)

🎭- Are there any characters you as the author don't really understand? Why?

⚔️- Which character shows anger in the same way as you?

😭- Which character shows sadness in the same way as you?

❤️- Which character shows care in the same way as you?

🎉- Which character shows joy in the same way as you?

💩- How many of your characters have self-esteem issues and are you aware that we all enjoy your presence on the hellsite?

👁️- Is this character based off someone you know in real life? Who?

🦴- How does this character process death?

Pretend Legal Mumbo Jumbo: By answering one of these asks you give your consent for all other participants to attempt psychoanalysis (or satirical psychoanalysis) in the replies and reblogs, so long as this analysis is respectful and kind. You agree that PhoenixRadiant is not legally responsible for any therapy, epiphany, good vibes, bad vibes, dumb jokes, witty jokes, or other phenomena these answers, asks, and analyses may cause.

And now to tags the mutualses: @somethingclevermahogony,@theidealistcynic,@agirlandherquill, @the-ellia-west,@smudged-red-ink,@aestheic-writer18,@pastellbg, @tildeathiwillwrite,@illarian-rambling,@baconandeggs-25, @thewritingautisticat,@aalinaaaaaa,@elizaellwrites

[pokemonmadness]

need to talk about this my brain is itchy (aka moth spends the better part of their day psychoanalyzing a fictional character alongside their ocs)

So, I wanna do a post about one of my older sets of Pokemon OCs, but weirdly enough I want to talk about the specific dynamic between these characters and the canon character they're associated with. Plus this may brink more on being headcanons so to speak, so, there's that too.

One of the first sets of Pokemon OCs I came up with was Andy and Ellie/Eloise (Ellie used to have a different name but I ignore that anymore lmao) -- something similar goes with Noel because he used to be wayyy different. But, they're some of my earlier Pokemon OCs, all meant to be related to Lysandre, via being his family.

Now this could all brink too on how old Lysandre is. Personally, I kind of imagine him to be in his early-mid 40s. But, the way it goes is that Lysandre and Noel had two kids more on accident than anything, not having planned to have them. Andy is around 18, Ellie is around 20. I can infodump more about them later, but it's always gotten me interested in a certain aspect: what if Lysandre was a parent, and how would that effect his partner and/or his kids?

Looking at Lysandre as a person, he's complex. He's two-sided, wanting to come off as being very personable, very charitable, very humble. One of the good people of the world. And has he done some good in his life? Sure. But beneath that surface is a man who's obsessed with perfection, obsessed with what is truly just a subjective concept, of perfection and ugliness. But, to him that doesn't matter. He's experienced first hand the greediness of humanity, and it's something that was bad enough to where he felt this obsessive need to then want to cleanse the world of its impurities. But in reality, that didn't truly matter. To him the only worthy ones are those who agree with him, in essence. The ones who follow him, or who give up their lives for him. (Though he also sees something in the player in X and Y, and asks if you want to join him.) But, there's one thing specific about his character that I find fascinating. He doesn't seem like he's fully in control of himself sometimes. There are times where it seems like he's having an internal struggle, does he truly want to go through with what he wants to do? He doesn't like the idea of having to kill the Pokemon to get what he wants. One could argue that perhaps there's something deeper about him, maybe the battle between a different part of him versus who he is now. Who knows? Lysandre's past, outside of him being a scientist, isn't very much known. This is a bit of word vomit, so, I apologize if it is inaccurate or it doesn't make sense. And, me bringing up him not being in control is not to diminish the bad things he has done or that he's attempted to do. (Also, technically I could bring up Alain, but unfortunately I don't remember about him or the anime all too well. Though, there is an older thread talking about the dynamic between Lysandre and Alain, and the potential emotional abuse that occurred, at the end of the post.)

But then, you get into the idea of that, but as a parent. You take Alain's situation, and you could potentially use that to help see this. Going back to Andy and Ellie, it's important to know too the relationship that'd be between Lysandre and Noel. The two had met when they were much younger, somewhere around their later teens, and after a few years, they dated, and had Ellie. (I feel it is necessary to not Noel is a transgender man, and came out when Andy and Ellie were young children.) Andy was born two years after Ellie, but their parents weren't married. When they did get married, that's when their relationship completely splintered. They needed to just split up for a while, they needed to take a break. They would divorce not long later, maybe a half year after. Noel offered to take both the kids, to take a load off of Lysandre, but he decided to try to help, by taking one of the kids. Split custody to a degree, but Noel was still open to taking Andy in, as they're the one who went with Lysandre when Noel and Ellie moved back to Snowbelle City. (Wherever Lysandre currently lives, I'm not sure.) All of this to then get into the dynamic of Lysandre as a father, of being raised by him.

Andy, between the time they were a young child (say around 6) up until they were 18, lived with Lysandre. Think of it like this, to the outside world, what did they have to complain about? They got anything they wanted, any games, clothes, et cetera. To the outside world, Andy was lucky, getting to be the child of one of Kalos's most prominent men. Thing is the two did have a good relationship when Andy was a child. But after the divorce, that's when things slowly began souring. Lysandre grew distant, becoming more absorbed with his work, and slowly starting to steep himself in his hatred towards humanity. Andy was starting to grow up, they became a teen, they did as any teen did in challenging their father, and beginning to argue with him. Not out of malice per se, but, that's just what happens during adolescence. In their case there was some frustration tied into it too, with never feeling good enough. All their accomplishments, awards, are put aside, just because Lysandre is working late. Because they are not more important than his ultimate goal. They grow reclusive and angry, hiding in their room for the most part (outside of taking care of the Pokemon around the house or making food, or cleaning), and disliking when other people are around. They dislike Team Flare and its scientists, they dislike Malva, and even for a point in time they disliked Professor Sycamore. (That I may get into more in the post I make about Andy, Ellie, and Noel, but to preface it some they hated how Augustine sort of blindly followed Lysandre. They do eventually start apprenticing under the professor though.)

Now another question could come into play here: where was Noel? He was there the whole time. He didn't have the ability to gain full custody of Andy again, but he also didn't want to completely disrupt their life with school and whatnot. Instead, he would let Andy stay over for extended periods, having Ellie's bedroom have a bunk bed for the siblings when Andy was over. He accommodated for them. And they tried to further do that when he learned about how Lysandre had been acting. Again, he was powerless, but he was also very tricky. Though then again Lysandre wouldn't have noticed because of work, or thinking Andy was just in their bedroom because of how much they isolated themself. So, he didn't worry all that much.

Lysandre did have his times where he seemed more remorseful, or in agreement with Andy, yes. But for the most part, the two were always at odds. And this all made Andy deteriorate mentally. (Side note here too, genetically speaking, while Andy looks more like a combo of Lysandre and Noel, or like a flower that exhibits signs of incomplete dominance, they inherited a lot of Lysandre's personality traits, as well as his mental illnesses, and other physical issues which I just imagine to be stomach problems. Don't ask I already cursed someone with this knowledge. Sorry Kat /lh) In that note, they do already have Lysandre's mental problems; bipolar depression and OCD being the most prominent, as well as delusions from BD, which I also believe Lys has to deal with. But, as time went on, there was more and more that got added to this. But, that's when we get into Andy finding out about Lysandre's ultimate plan.

Imagine finding out what your father has been doing, since you were a child, was something leading to doomsday was leading to something you ultimately would not be apart of, because you despise what your father has become, what he is doing. When Andy found out about the plan to activate the Ultimate Weapon, and to wipe out all he does not deem to be worthy. The ugliness in the world. In reality that just means to wipe out all but Team Flare. You are a teen still, and you find all of this out. Of course this caused issues for Andy. It caused stress, and fear. More mental health problems developed, paranoia and BPD. Because what they realized in all of that too was that there was no room for them in this new world. They were Lysandre's child, sure, But, they were not a part of Team Flare, did not like what they were doing, and strongly disagreed with their father. The same could be said for Noel and Ellie as well. And this caused them to panic.

A question I can hear already is, what about Ellie? I haven't mentioned her relationship with Lysandre, because they barely have one with him. Again she was raised by Noel, not by Lysandre. She seldom interacted with him, and when she did, it was awkward in nature. And as time went on it got even more awkward, especially as Andy was telling her and their other dad about what was going on. If anything this just made things more awkward. Unlike Andy, she doesn't really look up to Lysandre. She knows he's her father but she doesn't want to pursue things like he does, she isn't a scientist but she is personable. She has the better traits Lys has, the sociability and intelligence. But, she doesn't want to pursue life like how he does, and in fact spends a lot of her time at home with Noel to help him get around. And she doesn't mind doing that. She isn't chasing any big dreams, she's living in the moment when she's allowed to.

Now what about Noel? How did he feel about all of this, seeing how his ex-husband has not only apparently gone off the deep end, or been doing do for the last several years, but the child he trusted Lysandre to raise has a bunch of issues now thanks to their father's problems. So, there are times he's close to wringing Lys's neck. But at the same time, he gets emotional about it, angry at himself almost, feeling like there was more he could have done to prevent this, even if again he was powerless. He misses the man he fell in love with, and wants him back, but he truly does hate the man he became.

The thing is too, deep down, all Andy ever wanted was for their father to see the error in his ways, to understand he couldn't change the world on a whim, that this was genocide. The pleaded with him, all they wanted was their papa back. All they wanted was to look back and to see their father, not a complete stranger. And all of that in the end took a horrid effect on their mental health. They did start healing over time, yes. But they still find themself constantly conflicted. If Lysandre dies, they wonder if that's truly what they wanted. But if he doesn't die, they still struggle with the idea of him still being out and about, if he's not put into prison that is. As ambiguous as it is, they find themself with more questions than answers in the end.

And how Lysandre would feel would be a mystery. Because there is a chance where he would regret what he did, where he would wish he could go back and make things normal, if that's truly what he wanted. To be normal again, to feel normal again. But there's the chance too that he only regrets his plans not working, because it just means he'll be seen as a pariah or someone who's mentally unstable. He isn't in control anymore, and feels scorned because of it. He made too many mistakes in the end. Even thinking about this could be subjective, wondering about it and our answers could be subjective.

Could I keep yammering about this? Yes. I genuinely could. I don't know why I'm yammering about this specifically, but, oh well. I'll probably post a more in depth analysis of Andy, Ellie, and Noel later on, but content wise I'm going to leave it at this, only adding a couple notes. If anything I mentioned above mental illness wise is at all inaccurate I apologize, even if it was just the names of particular disorders. Also, this isn't anything to demonize Lysandre or mental illness, I just think he's a really fascinating character. I think the same with a majority of the villainous Pokemon bosses, but lately I've been a bit hyperfixated on Kalos. (That, and Galar.) I know it's obvious I'm not demonizing anything, it's just something I'd like to re-iterate. If you'd like to ask anything about this feel free too, or if you'd like to figure out why I posted this, your guess is mine but maybe I'll have an explanation. (also I just like to infodump hehe)

(I'll also still link the post regarding Alain that I mentioned above if you'd like to give it a read, it's interesting to see.)

[1eoness]

i loved hearing abt ur perspective on that matter 😭😭😭 not good with words but one thing i will say is most dead dove fics i see are from fandoms who preach abt problematic characters, its so rare to actually find any of them, like, this is just an example but everyone knows how famous hp is and ive read probably hundreds of fics (from ao3, which is kinda surprising since EVERYTHING is there, right?) and ive only ever come across one dead dove fic, which, again, i was startled bc i didnt even know what it meant so i think with warnings or none, it wont stop anyone from reading it. i guess i cant say anything abt how sa victims say its their own way to cope and it might be wrong to say this but i just think if a bad thing happened to me, why would i glorify it? and why would i ever want to influence people and make them think its normal and that they should want it too? its honestly just sad, especially, like u mentioned, when they say "a fictional character has no feelings" but theyre making leon an object of their sick fantasies, it sucks when all we get from them is "just block", followed by getting mocked, its just sad to see bc i feel like, how fucked up do you have to be to treat others like that? sure, maybe they have mental illnesses, but its like, theyre using it to justify their wrongdoings instead of actually trying to get better

anw... i dont know u much and i havent kept up with ur fics and stuff but i got to say i have a lot of respect for u and am looking forward to more of your works! or if not, i wanna say i admire u as a person 🫡

tw: mentions of dead dove, PTSD, mental stress disorders, trauma regarding SA. i understand! and thank you but you really don't have to praise me for saying this <3

i won't go on a whole ramble trying to deeply psychoanalyze these kinds of writers but to (attempt) to sum it up shortly: PTSD, and a lot of other kinds of stress disorders tend to corrupt you throughout your growth; it forces you into a kind of regression and when you're unable to get help for multiple kinds of reasons, you tend to turn to the internet because well, it's just a click away. when you feel like your only strength is your writing you will tend to "weaponize" it (but not really per se), then the result becomes... that.

it's i guess, what people commonly testify it as, "trying to regain control". which i don't doubt for one moment, i genuinely do think that people who write this kind of "fiction" are victims who desire a taste of control again. they wanna be able to twist their perceptions and perceive their trauma differently because they've been enslaved by it mentally. perspective matters here: what an expressed fantasy is to the viewer, may actually be a vent from the writer. [i cannot stress this enough. but if you're going to publicize this kind of stuff, you are still bound to public morality. so please stop ignoring the fact that dead dove content that pampers the concept of sexual assault is genuinely harmful. no one should ever write that in a way that perceives sexual assault as "desirable" and "a want".] otherwise, any kind of writer who glorifies and makes market-focused art out of sexual assault are sick and they know who they are, they just don't want to take accountability for it. i always think there's a better choice to be made.

[princecrows]

Okay, some thoughts on people not relating to characters they're kinning: (The 1% of people who believe kinning is purely spiritual please look away and forget all about me psychoanalyzing you.)

I think the sentiment comes from a want to express the process of identifying with and relating to a character without wanting to condone their actions. Which I sympathize with.

I still think you're wrong though, definitionally. (The oxford dictionary shows identifying with as a synonym to relating with, if we want to go there. As well as relating to means having a relationship with, which you certainly have to anything you kin.) I understand that you can relate to a character you condemn the actions of, fundamentally, though, this is no different than just normally kinning a traditionally "good" character, because they have flaws that you should condemn as well.

I think some kinnies might inherently kin for more shallow reasons than others but I also do not personally believe these people exist I have never seen them.

I will give you an example of a kinnie, and I will tell you why even though they do not relate to the fictional characters' experiences directly, they still do relate to them, and I will also prove my point about kinning being directly tied to analysis of a story in the process (an opinion I did not think would be so controversial), what fun! Let's begin.

This example is a kinnie I have known indirectly many times, the HABIT everyman hybrid kinnie, the HABIT kinnie is a child in real life, maybe a teenager, and does not relate to any of HABIT's experiences directly. However, you do not need to relate to characters' experiences directly to relate to them.

Generally, one might relate to a fictional monster such as HABIT, because of the emotional reality of his character (you might have mood swings, feel out of control mentally, be egotistical, have a fun and jovial attitude about you, like the band animal collective. Last one was a joke but it wouldn't be invalid.)

Or perhaps you relate to the reaction other people have to his character. You do not need to be a bad person to relate to the feeling of people treating you like a monster. One does not have to personally experience any of the things dogs do to relate to dogs. Now, I cannot list every reason someone would relate to HABIT, I don't know them all. Maybe you relate to bunnies, and you relate to HABIT due to him having bunny imagery. (Not invalid.)

The fact you can't consider any of these realities proves my point about analysis being heavily related to kinning. It's too narrow-minded- as kinning is an extension of the relationship you can have with any art, and you cannot opt out of your perception of art and the relationship you have with it reflecting on how you view yourself and your reality. Not. Fucking. Optional. Kinning as an extension of that relationship within fictionkin means you invited this in and wanted to explore this relationship further. The fact you don't know that is concerning for media literacy, honestly.

This is also why kinning is both opted into and not-opted into. You consented to this framework (kinning) as an articulation of your reality. That reality would exist without the framework (kinning) and therefore is not opted into, but you did consent to it. Therefore: you do willingly kin every single character you do kin because you opt into the framework to look at your reality. You can opt out of that framework, but it feels dishonest. But you can. Kinning is not forceful. You can just not kin.

I don't want to inherently dismiss people who view kinning with a religiousness or spirituality to it though, to me, this relationship (all of what I have talked about in this tumblr post) is deeply spiritual. I don't not view kinning as spiritual because I think there's a huge psychological and real components that are based in deep truth to our relationships with art and our relationships with ourselves. To me, understanding this fully is how I show reverence to it.

I have been accused of not viewing this relationship with any spirituality, at all, which is not true in the fucking slightest. If there is one thing I believe in, religiously, it is the relationship between people and art. The difference between me and someone who believes 100% that kin is purely spiritual, is blind belief.

There's also the inherent issue with the idea that because a character is bad or does bad things you can't relate to them but that's an idea that goes beyond the fictionkin community and goes into how we view "bad people" in real life.

[annikuh]

good morning I need to rant into the void bc I don’t see my therapist again til Friday and I had a hard night :3

I love to put off papers til Sunday bc my partner goes to work all day and I get to have my room to myself. However I had some sort of unplanned breakdown last night so now I have to write about the cultural impact of the stupid fucking Texas chainsaw massacre while wrangling with the fact that I very well may be highly depressed & nothing really makes me happy anymore & the things that do make me happy are cancelled out by some internalized shame about it & that I am incapable of being anything more than surface-level vulnerable to someone & that I may hate myself more than previously thought & contemplating the complicated toxicity of my relationship with my mother & fearing I’m going to end up like one of my parents & wondering if any of my psychiatric care is working bc I know I’m kind of lying to my psychiatrist about if my meds are working and about using weed and I’m too embarrassed that my therapist is going to think I’m cringe (or way worse) if I tell her some of the things eating me alive & wondering if my mood stabilizers and anti psychotics are even helping and if I should just go off them to see if they really are (bad idea) & managing a gender crisis & managing an identity crisis & contemplating every evil I’ve ever done and all the evil im readily capable of doing & psychoanalyzing everything about how I’m feeling to point out that I have no real coping mechanisms aside from (1) jerking off for four hours at a time and still not feeling fulfilled at the end of it bc I’m ashamed of my jerkoff material and (2) trying to love myself by identifying with awful fictional characters that I like and trying to transfer those positive feelings about them over to me which is fucking embarrassing & feeling anxious that I’m becoming complacent and apathetic about everything around me & feeling ashamed of everything I do & feeling extremely lonely & slamming my head against the wall because I feel so closed off from everyone emotionally because I’m just incapable of doing anything that I even slightly perceive will get me judged based only on my own projection & that all of these issues are my fault & that I may have suppressed trauma that I can’t remember which made me such a fucking freak (hoping almost, bc the reality that I may just be naturally terrible is overwhelming) & wondering yeah maybe I should just go off my meds and ruin my life and lose all my friends and ruin my relationship and either kill myself or end up in some facility bc I’m too scared to actually start my life so why not just destroy it or totally end it & probably some other stuff too yeah maybe.

but the paper is only 1-2 pages double-spaced which is super easy for me to get thru. I usually blow past that limit anyway bc I’m long-winded with many ideas and observations about this topic bc I am a genius /s (and I’m a fuckin overachiever and if I don’t graduate with a 4.0 I gotta kill myself anyway. add this concern to the aforementioned list).

I need a sugar daddy to fund my therapy bills I think bc this is too much for just one session a week lol I may be in a worse place now than I was after being assaulted and dropping out of school lmao. at least I was still doing theater then. scary stuff‼️

hope everyone has a good Sunday :)

[marblemoovt]

Hi again! This is long but I’m just really into your one shot and wanted to respond to the ramble it it’s ok ❤️

It’s fascinating to hear about your thought process as you wrote this one shot. Your care in psychoanalyzing the characters is what makes it feel so real! Also, if I may I add—as a fellow realist who spends a lot of her time daydreaming about fictional characters living out different scenarios, I totally get why this story needed to take place in a non-eclipse universe. 💔

Which takes me to the next point…that this one shot is a huge what if; as you said, what if Griffith met his equal and thus no longer feels the need to drag himself and everyone he supposedly holds dear down such a harrowing path? I love that you provide glimpses into Griffith’s true nature—both the good and the bad. I specifically keep rereading the parts where Griffith wonders why the princess matters to him so much and when he flat out admits he’s trying to figure her out. And the ending is just…ugh! My heart! The princess has such a hold on Griffith that I’m convinced there’s an actual chance that he won’t later devolve into a complete monster. I love that you humanize Griffith without making him OOC.

I adore Sadie being the one to talk sense into the princess, letting her know that she’s offering an escape if all goes wrong. I commend you for tying all the loose ends together while keeping it realistic :)

Lastly I want to say I fully understand why you’d have mixed feelings toward Griffith. I think many people feel the same. Sometimes you just want to see the good in others and I think that desire can grow when you encounter purely evil, depraved characters like Griffith. Just my thoughts! If you read all this, thank you for doing so! Please don’t feel pressured to respond quickly or at all. I’m just happy to chat with someone about the nuances of Griffith’s character.

Response below:

You are so right about the huge what-if part, anon. I'm a sucker for happy endings--or at least endings where everyone doesn't die. And for that to even be possible, any chances of the eclipse occurring have to be yeeted out the window.

Providing the different glimpses of Griffith stems from my inability to reconcile who I want him to be and who he is lol. I want him to be good, but I know he wouldn't hesitate to sacrifice anything for his dreams (as proved by the eclipse). I also just wanted to toy with the idea of what it would be like to be loved by someone but never be their top priority. And could that be changed?

Sadie was a complete accident. I needed a reason for the reader to go into town and Sadie poofed into existence. She was meant to be like an NPC with minimal to no background/personality. But I love a good sassy friend who has your back. I thought that since the majority of the nobility disapprove of the reader's behaviour outside of formal settings, there should be someone who accepts all these aspects and even encourages them in a healthy way. Suffice it to say I love Sadie and her knee-cap-breaking gremlin energy.

I feel like the desire to see the good in evil/depraved characters reminds me of when people say 'I can fix them'. You want to see the good, and so you believe it exists and that you can bring it out of them. But I don't believe that people can change unless they decide for themselves. Because at the end of the day, no matter how much you love someone, that person won't change unless they really want to.

This was something I wanted to be careful about in this oneshot. I didn't want Griffith to 'change' solely because of love. I wanted it to be more nuanced than that. I don't think I got around to it in this oneshot. But hopefully, I can delve further into this whenever I write a continuation.

I think Griffith is a rational person, he's very calculative in everything he does. This is why I wanted him to start developing little impulses that throw him off and cause him to re-evaluate his situation. I think unconditional love would be a foreign concept to him, he would even deny its existence. That's where the reader comes in and shatters everything he believes in, and he realizes that there are other ways to achieve his goal. For once, there's someone he can't bear to trample as a stepping stone even if it moves him closer to his dreams. And this frustrates him to no end. I just think realizing what you wanted might not actually be what you want is such a neat trope. Because how do you account for another person in your future when you're so used to only considering yourself?

Feel free to send any more asks about Griffith or other characters I might know! It's always fun to analyze and see other people's interpretations. It also helps with characterization when writing them.

[thatgirl4815]

Red

Totally random thought, but I’ve been thinking and..maybe red isn’t Kinn’s true color? ‘True’ as in, it represents something that has been applied to Kinn but doesn’t fully represent who he is. 

The Hidden Messages preview highlights Kinn’s color as red and Porsche’s color as blue, so there’s really no doubting that they’re intending us to view them as (at least partial) representations of these characters. For the purposes of this post, I’m going to focus exclusively on the color red. 

Symbolically, red often represents themes like dominance, anger, wrath, and strength. I’d argue that, in many cases outside of the romantic sphere, red has negative connotations. Aside from white and black, blue and red often represent forces of good and evil, respectively. Looking at it from this perspective, it makes sense that Kinn would be marketed as the “evil” of sorts given his ties to the mafia. Porsche would then be defined as a symbol of purity. We, of course, know that these are mere generalizations, but they seem to hold up for many fictional works. 

I mentioned how red has mostly negative connotations, but it can also represent warmth and security, both of which I think we see Kinn trying to encompass over the course of these past 7 episodes in his relationship with Porsche. On the surface, red might appear negative, but there is more to unpack if you look deeper. If Kinn’s color really is red, I think it’s meant to deceive us. I’m thinking back to Ep1, when Kinn’s persona seemed so stone-faced and mafia-like (for lack of a better term). He was embodying these negative associations with the color red: namely, dominance. 

Now, this is where I’ll bring in Vegas. The whole reason I was tempted to write about red at all is because of the use of color in Ep7, both in his clothes, and in the light that shines on his face in certain scenes:

And he’s been cast in a red light in other places as well:

I believe Vegas represents the kind of cruelty we typically associate with red. Not to imply that Vegas is a one-dimensional character, but from what we know of him, he is just plain evil: twisted, sadistic, and cruel. He is also power-hungry. He mentions how Kinn wants control, but he wants control also--he feeds off of it, in fact. I don’t want to attempt to completely psychoanalyze Vegas’s character here, but I do think that red suits him.

Vegas and Kinn

What, then, do we make of the fact that both Kinn and Vegas are associated with the color red? As I’ve said, I think that Vegas embodies the true meaning of red’s relatively negative associations--dominance, control, and wrath--while Kinn is merely posing as the color red. I’d argue that for Kinn, red represents his mafia persona that he tries so hard to embody. I don’t think this means that Kinn doesn’t represent any of these other attributes of the color red, such as dominance and control, because he certainly does, but I’d argue that it’s a result of this role in the mafia (and Korn’s pressure) more than who he really is at his core. 

And really, when I go back and watch that Hidden Messages video again, I can’t help but think how different Kinn seems there--it doesn’t even feel like the same character. Maybe it’s because we’ve been enlightened so much to his struggles (Ep6 ftw!!), but it’s interesting to look back on early promotional materials and consider how much they differ from the final product now. It’s not necessarily a bad thing (in fact, I think it’s quite the opposite). 

I’m probably reading into this too far, but I wonder about the colors that each character has been assigned. I don’t think their associations are nearly as black and white (pun intended) as we’ve been led to believe, and if we view them this way, then we miss out on some of the richer nuances of the characters.

[valkyrieandstrangeridingaragorn]

Speaking of negativity, I am so sick and tired of certain stans screaming "MISOGYNY!!!" every time someone criticizes Sylvie/Sylki. Is misogyny an issue in fandom? Yes. Does that mean that anyone who is even remotely critical of a female character is automatically a raging sexist? No.

Oh no, anyone who criticizes a woman is a misogynist. And while we're at it, if you criticize a queer character you're a homophobe/biphobe/etc, and if you criticize a black man you're a racist.

According to these idiots the best way to support and defend a group of oppressed people is to infantilize them, spread the idea that they're absolutely perfect and can never do any wrong, and anyone who dares say anything negative about a member of said group is a bigot and needs to be silenced.

It's more oppression and more discrimination disguised as progressiveness. Women/queer/POC are either subhuman or superhuman but they never get to be just human, which is exactly what we want to be. Just like everyone else, good and bad.

And the fact that these idiots are using fiction as a way to psychoanalyze and make moral judgments based on what characters people like or dislike is pathetic. But I guess this addiction to self-righteous outrage brings them joy and it makes them feel better than others.

Like you say, is misogyny a thing in fandom? Well of course, it's a thing everywhere sadly, that's the problem. But there's a huge difference between "We don't like this character because she's boring and one-dimensional" + "We don't like this ship because it's not healthy" and "We don't like this character because she's a woman". And the idiots who can't tell the difference can go eat a brick and stop acting like they care about feminism because it's pretty obvious they don't even know what it means.