#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

[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.”

[nknoxe-n]

Heya! Congrats on your milestone! I'd like to request for a matchup please.

Name: Aurora  Pronouns: they/them

MBTI: INFP Enneagram: 4w5 sp/sx Zodiac big 6: Cancer sun and moon, Pisces rising, Cancer mercury, Gemini venus, Leo mars Moral alignment: True neutral (leaning slightly towards lawful evil)

Personality: Introspective and rational, terrified of conflict. I daydream a lot and tend to space out when I’m not talking to someone. I’m a true introvert, but I love to talk to certain people and about things I find interesting, like my fixations or a fun hypothetical situation. I observe people more than I want to interact with them. I'm also good at reading people (to the point where my brother thinks I can read people's minds). Purple represents me best as a colour.

I value my authenticity, creativity and emotional intelligence (I can’t say I’m really empathetic, but I listen to people when they need me to and I try to be there for them). But I am quite sensitive and emotional. I tend to remember events in which I was hurt easily. My friend would describe me as a jaded Disney princess because I daydream a lot and used to be idealistic as a kid but now I'm more of a realist/pessimist. I also seem to be developing a bad habit of impulse buying cute things like phone charms because I now have easier access and money.

Honestly not sure how to describe my sense of humor. Sarcasm mostly? I also consider myself a good storyteller because I tell them for entertainment (comedic timing, a teensy bit of exaggeration), and get to laugh with whoever I'm telling the story to. I'm not the funny friend, but if I tell a story, it's going to be a good one.

Hobbies: Reading, looking for fanfiction with amazing writing styles (descriptions, vibes, the closer it reads like poetry, the better), writing (fanfiction for now, but I plan to become a professional writer in the future e.g. movies, tv shows, manga), listening to music, psychoanalyzing people, analyzing fictional characters, watching horror movie summaries

Likes: POETRY (I follow the web weave tag here and my favourite poet might just be Richard Siken), tofu (my favourite food), chocolate, books (the genres I tend to read are thrillers, fantasy or sci-fi), no longer human (my favourite book), the traveling cat chronicles (my favourite comfort book), anime (mostly shounen, but I've watched some movies as well), manga, analyzing characters with many layers to them, personality typology (the closest thing I've had to a hyperfixation. my all-time favourite is enneagram, but I’ve had astrology and MBTI phases), action or comedy movies, visiting cafes, looking at sunrises and sunsets, watching storms (LIGHTNING), crochet flowers and plushies, phone charms, the colour purple, browsing for makeup and accessories, video essays (marketing - celebrities, not companies, somewhat deep topics like love and philosophy, literature and film analysis - especially themes of horror movies, despite me being too chicken to actually watch the moves), butterflies and stars/night sky as motifs

Dislikes: Exercising, studying for subjects I'm not interested in, being forced to interact with people, people who don’t have an idea for their future career and float through life aimlessly (I mean people who don’t put in effort into studying as if their grades/school won’t affect their future opportunities. I’m still in college and I know there’s nuance, maybe not everyone wants or is happy with a well-paying/demanding job, but as someone whose parents have placed high expectations on since primary school, I can’t fathom not caring about one’s education like that), having a sudden change in plans that I don't like, many foods (I am a very picky eater), bugs (beetles, bees, spiders. I don’t kill them and are fine with them as long as they’re a distance away from me. I get scared when they move about tho), noisy environments/construction noises, small talk (I actually don’t mind talking to people, I just need them to talk about something interesting or at least something they’re passionate about)

Type: Someone intellectual that I can talk with. I wouldn't be able to stand a SO that often cuts me off when I'm trying to talk (especially when I would never do that to them), or someone that's only interested in talking about themselves. 

Have fun writing! Thanks for your hard work. ^^

Your Blue Lock Matchup: Yukimiya Kenyu

Based on your introspective and creative personality, as well as your love for deep conversations and emotional intelligence, Yukimiya is a fantastic fit for you. While he's not the most overtly emotional or dramatic guy, he has a thoughtful, somewhat reserved side. His quieter, more serious demeanour makes him someone who can understand your need for deep connection without overwhelming you with constant chatter.

Yukimiya, despite his outwardly confident appearance, is someone who can match your reflective mindset. His emotional depth often gets overshadowed by his confidence on the field, but there’s a vulnerability to him that only a select few gets to see. He’d respect your need for authenticity, as he's someone who doesn’t tolerate superficiality himself. In a relationship, he’d appreciate your introspective side and your ability to read people, because, much like you, he doesn’t always share everything right away.

Your love for storytelling would be something that Yukimiya can truly appreciate. He's the type of person who can listen intently when someone speaks to him—especially when the topic is one he finds intriguing. Your ability to craft stories with good comedic timing and flair would make for some entertaining conversations between the two of you. Whether it’s banter or a deeper conversation about the things you’re passionate about, he would be one to match your energy, even if he’s quieter at first. His introspective side means he’s the type who’d enjoy discussing hypothetical situations, deep character analyses, and all the interesting ideas you want to explore.

Emotionally, Yukimiya would understand the need for personal space and reflection. As someone who values authenticity and isn’t quick to share his emotions, he’d give you the time and space you need when you're feeling overwhelmed. He’s not the type to push, especially when it comes to handling emotional vulnerability. His respect for your need for time alone would allow you to process your thoughts and emotions in peace, yet he would always be there for you when you need him most.

Your shared love of analyzing characters and exploring deeper meanings would be another bond. Yukimiya's strategic and tactical mindset on the field reflects a certain depth to his thinking. You’d both enjoy psychoanalyzing characters from books, movies, and even from your own lives, constantly engaging in thoughtful, sometimes playful debates. He wouldn’t mind indulging in your detailed analyses of personality types and the like, especially if it gave him the chance to hear you share what’s on your mind. He’d enjoy your company, especially if it involves discussing things like psychology, films, or even dissecting the different facets of a character’s persona.

While you are a little sensitive and struggle with conflict, Yukimiya’s approach to things is more patient and thoughtful than it first appears. He’s not someone who likes to make a fuss or create tension, and he would likely avoid putting unnecessary strain on the relationship. However, when the time comes to communicate, he’d make sure that everything is said honestly and clearly, without leaving things unsaid. He might not always get things right, but his willingness to listen and approach things with patience would make him a reliable partner when conflict arises.

Your creative and intellectual side would be nurtured in this relationship. Yukimiya may not always understand the specifics of everything you enjoy, but he’d appreciate your passion and dedication to things like poetry, writing, and your creative hobbies. Whether it’s sharing books or even just talking about different ideas, he’d support you in your creative endeavours, quietly admiring the depth of thought you bring to the world around you.

[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.

[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

[lunatic-fandom-space]

ayyyyyyy i finished the first section of Queen of the Damned, iirc it was called The Legend of the Twins, yesterday and I continue to not have that much to say about it, so far this has not been the kind of book I can "liveblog" so to speak, which isnt really a good thing or a bad thing, its just A Thing about these books I think. It is a good thing though that I havent had much to say thus far, because usually when I have a lot to say about a piece of media its in the form of complaining. Like, if I had decided to do what Im doing for this book for The Vampire Lestat, I wouldve had nothing to say for most of the book except "Im having a really good time, Lestat is very fun, I do not remember the vampires having psychic to this extent in the first book but it has been a since I first read it so maybe its just that", and then the second he meets Marius I wouldve been hitting you with complaint after complaint after complaint, but I didnt do that, instead I hit you with ~4000 words of complaining after I was done with it

And like, the things that I complained about (that werent strictly lestat-related and me trying to psychoanalyze that guy) do essentially still apply, I do not care about this ancient vampire lore or the psychic lore (???) because I care about the characters and I care about the conversations that these books is engaging in about existentialism and religion and the meaning of life, and I do not think that all this weird bullshit adds anything to that. That being said, it did bother me a lot less in this one and theres two possible reasons for why. 1) its sprinkled in all throughout the story in a pretty elegant way (so far atleast) instead of not being there for most of the book and then you get hit with over ten chapters of just loredumping, and 2) I think ive accepted that we're just fully in a different genre/type of book now. Like, Im far from an expert on gothic fiction but Interview with the Vampire very much seemed to be that, whereas I would say that Queen of the Damned is more of an urban fantasy book. Also I feel like the former has a bit more of a literary feel to it while the latter is more plot-driven genre fiction, and then The Vampire Lestat is just kinda the awkward middle child thats trying to be both i guess. That also being said, some of this stuff is still just straightup stupid to me, even with my genre-expectations now adjusted. Namely the stuff with the ghosts and the psychics and the fact that theres people capable of telekenesis and especially the stuff about the paranormal investigation organization that can trace its roots back to the seventh century. I was also initially put off by the Great Family-stuff although that never seemed as overtly stupid to me

Really, what it comes down to with the paranormal organization (whose name I cannot remember for the life of me) and the Great Family and even the fact that the blood of older vampires makes other vampires physically stronger, which is something Ive complained about previously but didnt really elaborate on, is that its focused on ancient bloodlines in a way that feels fundamentally conservative, which I find deeply unpleasant. And like, I dont think they actually are all that conservative ideologically, I think its just that most of these characters are old-money rich people whose lifestyle gets romanticized a lot because yeah, being rich and powerful does sound pretty awesome and romantic conceptually. Also, this is one of those things that Im sure wouldnt have bothered me enough to bring up if I had read these books a few months ago, but the thing is, Im reading these books after I started to read the Scarlet Pimpernel series which is a series that is so genuinely vile in its conservatism that I think its made me lose my patience when it comes to this kind of more innocuous and inoffensive ideologically conversative stuff. Like, the first book was fine and I enjoyed it enough that I was like "yeah, I'll read the other ~40 books in this series (although there were definitely moments where I was like "yknow, ive read books from the late 1800s that were more progressive than this one from 1904...."), but then the second one disgusted me so much in its barely-disguised hatred of poor people and its glorification of the aristocracy and the idle gentry that i was like "okay no, I need an extended break from this" so now Im reading the Vampire Chronicles instead

But yeah, other than that, Im having a pretty fun time. I really like a lot of the characters, I think the only one that actively annoyed was Pandora which I think is mostly because of her being introduced as connected to Marius who I dont care for at all. I mean, Khayman was also connected to Marius but I think he made up for it by being another vampire whos just really happy in the modern world, which is something that I really love. I think Jesse and Maharet and their relationship are all really compelling but it always kinda felt like this interesting character-stuff was being interrupted for this uninteresting stupid lore-stuff, but a lot of the character stuff is tied to the lore-stuff so I dont really think you could "fix that" for me without getting completely radical, so. I loved Baby Jenks' (? is that how you spell it) chapter, both because its interesting seeing the perspective of an actual young vampire that was turned recently, and because the way it was written was so weird and funny to me. Like, theres a certain character to the writing of these books which is obviously Anne Rice's, but I also feel like its Lestat's and its pretty consistant across all the chapters, even though theyre meant to be based on these people's accounts and/or their thoughts and they would presumably have different ways of thinking and expressing their thoughts, but then Baby Jenks' chapter is just pure 80s edgy teen tryhardness and its so strange to read (in a good way). And then theres Daniel's chapter which of course made me absolutely insane, but that goes without saying

[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

[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.

[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.

[simstationdance]

Can I ask 🥺, 😅, ✨ and 😈 please? Thank you!

Is there a certain type of moment or common interaction between your characters that never fails to put you in your feels?

This feels really hard to explain but I really like it when characters have quiet Heart 2 Heart(tm) moments, always gets me feeling Emotions.... even if I can't remember writing & posting something like that (either I haven't done it yet or my memory is just that bad)

What's a story or scene you've created that you're a smidge embarrassed exists?

This weird song post I did, probably. Not sure how much it counts as a 'story', tho. I'm not so embarrassed of it that I felt the need to destroy it or anything, but as I once put it - "I woke up possessed by the spirit of 2007" and it's never good when that happens 😂

Give you and your writing a compliment. Go on now. You know you deserve it. 😉

oh god im not good at giving OR taking compliments.. words are hard

Uh... Something I feel like I'm really good at when I write more traditional 'prose' style stories is my ability to get into a character's head. The format I choose for my tumblr posts doesn't quite let me get as 'deep' as I would like, but I still manage to do it sometimes. It mostly comes from me being a total nerd who can't help but psychoanalyze every fictional character I come across lmao

With regards to this blog specifically, I like to think I've gotten better at this sims storytelling thing since I started doing it 2-ish years ago dfgsdsg

Has there been a point in a story where you did something just to be playfully mean to your readers?

I didn't really do it on purpose since I was mostly going off of in-game events, but there was the time when Glabe's story was about to uh... 'end', if you catch my drift, and once it happened, various people in the replies and the tags were like "NOOO!! NOOOOOOO" and I was like ".........hehe :)"

[ruby-whistler]

therapy psa

hey there! have you ever said, “(character) needs to go to therapy! they need to get them help they need” in fandom context? 

that’s cool! nothing wrong with that! i used to say and still say that a lot both before and after i went into therapy, because to put it simply, characters in nowadays’ media face a lot of very traumatizing and stressful situations in quick succession. however before i got my own treatment i had a lot of very confusing thoughts about what therapy actually entails, so as someone who has been going through cognitive-behavioural treatment (for ptsd and anxiety) for about a year, i’d like to perhaps just inform people who are unsure about the concept.

so uh, welcome to my essay! the gist of it is:

1. what a therapist does and doesn’t do 2. why that matters when talking about therapy or writing about it

just a quick note, again, that i am not licenced or professional or anything of that sort. i have an interest in psychology, but i’ve picked all of this stuff up by observing my own psychotherapist. if you feel like you need professional help, please reach out and try to schedule an appointment close to where you live.

1. so... what is therapy?

let me preface this by saying the main point of this post, which i will probably be repeating a couple of times throughout this: therapy =/= emotional support. your therapist isn’t there to hug you and tell you everything will be alright. so, what does a therapist do?

- professional diagnosis

your therapist will most likely give you sheets of paper to fill out at your first appointment, ask you questions, give you tasks to complete, psychoanalyze you and diagnose you. they will find out exactly what is going on with you; after all, they’ve been to school for that and as much as you might feel lost in your problems, they know what they are called, why they happen and how to solve them.

- instructions

the psychologist will not “therapize” you on the spot. think of it as piano lessons; you come there once to twice per two months for a one to (rarely) four hour session. most appointments sit around the one hour mark. much like on a piano session, you show off your progress in that one hour and talk about what things you’re having difficulty with. your therapist will then give you advice as to what you should try to do, and send you off for a few months to deal with life.

your therapist, and this is hard to swallow but important, will not coddle you. if you keep bringing up a problem over and over again because it seems large to you, but they keep changing the theme to something else, you might even get frustrated. but a (good) therapist knows more about your brain than you do. they’re not there to validate your feelings, they’re there to help get rid of the ones that stop you from functioning normally.

what they will do, is go; “hey. stop focusing on that so much. i know it makes your life hard, but it’s part of a larger problem. from an objective perspective, you should shift your attention to this issue and solve it instead. if it keeps happening, you do the breathing and mental exercises i taught you, but the only way to stop it is to try and resolve this underlying problem.”

a therapist 99% of the time will not have an emotional attachment to you. you’re a name in their many alphabetically sorted files from which they take out yours and check through their notes before each session. then they will help you solve your issues by explaining the things happening in your brain and instructing on how to fix them. nothing less or more. you will usually not have an attachment either, because that’s not the point of going to therapy. therapy isn’t emotional support. 

- further help

if your mental health issues/mental illnesses cross a certain line, your therapist will direct you to a psychiatrist for further help such as medicine or other kinds of treatment. most therapist do cognitive-behavioural therapy, which “helps people learn how to identify and change destructive or disturbing thought patterns that have a negative influence on behavior and emotions.” however, in intense cases this is not enough. your psychotherapist will help you get the additional treatment you need.

another thing they can do is legal things! documents, things to give to your school, job, the authorities, other technical things. they are a higher authority when it comes to a lot of things, and can make your life easier.

- other

this doesn’t mean you can’t talk about life or must be all objective or only talk about the negatives. your therapist will often try to get you to view your issues in a more positive light, ask about other things that make you happy or distract you. you are pretty much free to ramble to them! they’re happy to know, and if it makes you feel better, there is no need to be all gloomy at your therapist appointments. if your therapist is alright with you rapping the entirety of hamilton at some point, or you explaining c!dream’s arc on the dream smp, feel free. if you feel happy talking about something, that’s good! you have something to latch onto and distract yourself from the hell in your brain. 

i’ve learned that thinking about things that give you comfort when things get rough is a big part of cognitive-behavioural treatment, in order to stop that good ol’ thought spiral of anxiety.

2. why is this important to know?

well, i think a thing many people overlook when talking about fictional characters going into therapy is the fact that,, therapy by itself often isn’t enough.

i asked my therapist a few days ago what my family could do when i’m having an anxiety attack. she replied, “they can be there for you. they can keep up conversation, distract you from the stressor, assure you that nothing bad is really happening and that they care about you.”

this is something really important that people forget; emotional support does wonders. your friends, family, whoever, if they provide support it’s suddenly much less terrifying to go through the healing process.

a character being sent to therapy and left to fend for themselves is not a happy ending. it’s not going to heal them quickly, it will be extremely difficult to go through all that on their own. the more the people who care about you understand your struggles and try to be there for you, the less scary it gets. they’ll ground you, they’ll hug you, they’ll make you a mug of hot chocolate and they’ll hold your hand and say “everything’s ok. everything will be ok”. because the mental harm in your brain is more often than not a consequence of things being not ok in the past. remembering that it is ok now is important. having emotional support can both remind your that it’s all in your head, and assure you that your feelings are valid and people will be there for you for as long as it takes for things to finally be ok, or as ok as they can be.

as much as professional help is very important, this is vital to the healing process. having people be there for you and just having people who support you in general. 

i think people should put more weight on that than just “character needs therapy.” character needs therapy and emotional support. these two go together, and character needs both. you might be, or try to be strong, but it’s comforting to be.... well, comforted. “get them the help they need” no. get them the help they need and then on top of that provide the help they need. 

that’s all. just something i thought was important to remember.

- ruby