#realistically i don't think it will happen

[nostalgebraist]

Thanks for this thoughtful review!

(BTW, for others – this is probably obvious but there are spoilers below the readmore, don't click unless you've read the book)

I'm going to use this as an opportunity to talk about one specific thing that bugs me about some reader reactions to my stuff. Therefore, most of what I say below will be negative (about your review), but I want to emphasize first that that's not a reflection of what I thought of it overall.

----

What I'm here now to talk about is this kind of thing:

There are parts of all his books, where I really think that the explanation for why they are the way they are is that they are "bad on purpose", and all the bullshit [note: in context "bullshit" seems to be meant as a neutral term for non-realist elements -nost] is a way of turning these shortcomings into strengths. The self-effacing voice which whispers that the characters aren't sufficiently well-drawn, are too cartoonish—well, what if that was the point? What if there was a reason for that, in the story?

And like... okay, there is sort of a sense in which this is true, sometimes, kinda. There is a grain of truth to this; it is getting at something real.

But it pains me to say that, because I don't want to encourage this kind of reading. Interpretations like this are occasionally correct but IMO they're much more common than they should be. IMO the right intuition is that this is a galaxy-brained, contrarian sort of take, a last resort you land on when you've ruled out everything else.

And not just with my work, with everything – I'm simply more aware of the problem when it comes to my work, because I wrote it and I'm aware of why I actually did things the way I did.

I've said this before, but watching the way that people react to my own fiction has been an eye-opening experience, one that has taught me things about reader (and viewer, etc.) reactions in general. Specifically, what I've learned was:

People's tastes are way more diverse than I had realized (before I started writing and sharing fiction). And they are diverse in a very fine-grained way; even if two readers have the same preferences about 90% of stuff, or 95%, they'll still diverge on some things. While it's not literally true that "every reader is a unique snowflake with a preference set that no one else shares," that is a very good first approximation of how things are.

Readers (including me!) have been trained by a lifetime of reading book/movie/etc. reviews to frame their preferences/reactions in a pseudo-objective "this is just how it is" way, like their own tastes have some special viewpoint-independent priority, a quality of "reality" or "accuracy" lacking in everyone else's tastes (which are all different, cf. 1). And this is not just a stylistic quirk of the way people write about fiction, it actually (IMO) feeds back into the underlying opinions behind the written commentary. It degrades people's ability to understand what it is they're looking at and their ability to make accurate inferences about the process of its creation.

----

Here's a sort of cartoonish schematic of the type of experience that led me to draw these conclusions. (And I suspect this is not just a thing that happens to me, I imagine it happens with any sort of work that "contains a lot of different types of stuff" the way mine does.)

Writer makes something that has X and Y and Z in it. Writer thinks X/Y/Z are "great tastes that taste great together." Writer is very pleased with the result.

Reader 1 has similar tastes to writer, says something brief about how they loved the book and it's a new favorite for them.

Reader 2 loves X, is OK with Y, hates Z. They write a lengthy review saying that the book was a mixed bag and could have been great if the writer had stuck to X and not messed things up by doing so much Z.

Reader 3 is the reverse of their predecessor: they hate X, are OK with Y, love Z. They write a lengthy review saying that the book was a mixed bag and could have been great if the writer had stuck to Z and not messed things up by doing so much X.

Reader 4 loves X and Z – but they hate Y. They write a lengthy… you can fill in the rest. Imagine a whole bunch of these guys (readers 5, 6, etc).

Reader 17 has the same tastes as Reader 2: loves X, is OK with Y, hates Z. But their lengthy review takes a different, in some sense "more charitable" angle, speculating that the inclusion of Z was a load-bearing pillar in the overall structure, a thing that unfortunately had to be included to "unlock" all that sweet sweet X.

Reader 18 has the same tastes as Reader 3: hates X, is OK with Y, loves Z. But, they explain, X was a load-bearing pillar in the overall structure, a thing that unfortunately had to be included to "unlock" all that sweet sweet Z.

Writer reads all these reviews and feels strange, dizzy. The "nicer" reviews like 17 and 18 are actually more uncomfortable to read than the "meaner" ones like 2 and 3.

"I don't know how to convince you guys," Writer thinks, "but I... I just liked all of it? I thought it was good? That was why I wrote it? (Why else would I have written it?)"

----

Or, as I wrote in that previously linked post from 2021, w/r/t TNC specifically (and making a slightly different but closely related point):

Some people say X was the worst part of TNC, some people say X was the best part. The story was a celebration of Y; the story was about how Y is laughably futile. It’s a letdown that we were never told more about Z; the reason TNC is good is that it leaves stuff like Z to the imagination. It was obvious we were meant to believe P; it is obvious we were meant to believe not-P; the ambiguity about whether P is tiresome literary masturbation; at least the story didn’t jump the shark by spelling out whether P! The reason people like TNC is, of course, that it has A, although nostalgebraist insisted on putting B in there too because he hasn’t fully perfected his formula yet / he somehow thinks B is good even though it isn’t / he thinks it’s funny how bad B is (but the joke tires). …and then someone else has same take, but with A and B flipped.

This exact sort of thing is of course happening again before our eyes with reactions to TAoHS.

I've encountered multiple readers who disliked most of the story but felt the ending (sort of) "redeemed it," and I've also encountered multiple readers who liked the story up until the ending but disliked the ending (or at least thought it was worse than the rest) – to say nothing of the many readers who liked (or disliked) the whole thing all the way through.

And this ending-related stuff is just one particularly obvious facet of a broader diversity in the overall reader response.

By now I know not to be surprised by this stuff, and even to find it kind of fun to watch... but I have to admit, it is still a dizzying and uncomfortable experience.

----

Now, as I said, it is sometimes true that things really are "bad on purpose."

But I think the interpreter's default hypothesis – which should be maintained by default unless convincing evidence against it can be brought forth – should be:

The writer thinks that the thing they wrote is good. They think the ideas are good and they think they executed them well. And they think this more-or-less homogeneously for everything in the work – there are no "bad but unfortunately necessary" parts from the writer's POV.

(At least, this should be the default with works that aren't making the writer much/any money. Obviously things are different with lucrative commercial fiction; there are plenty of well-paid hacks who know they're hacks and do it for the money, etc.)

Why should this be the default? Multiple reasons.

First: it takes a lot of effort to produce any sort of creative work. The writer thought that effort was worthwhile, for some reason – why?

The most straightforward explanation (and a very common one IMO) is that the writer simply believed in the thing that they were making. They believed the effort was worthwhile because it would yield a good product.

Second: as a writer you have an immense amount of freedom. It's difficult to overstate the extent of it. You are playing God, you decide the way that literally everything will be.

Obviously there are some constraints, cases where one part of a story will imply the existence of another or whatever.

But it's very rare that you actually get forced into "doing a thing you know you are bad at, badly." After all: why do that? No one's forcing you! Just do something else! You're God, you control everything!

(Note that this applies also to the very act of writing anything. No one is forcing you to write at all. If you can't come up with good ideas, nothing prevents you from just not writing your bad ones.)

Third: at least in my experience, "playing God" in this way requires a certain state of mind, a certain boldness and self-assurance, which is incompatible with thinking "yeah this is gonna suck but I have to do it" – but is very compatible with thinking "I am making something excellent and every part of it is excellent, hell yes."

Fourth: because of the previously noted diversity of reader preferences, it should not be surprising to any given reader that they find some parts of the work much better than others, even if the writer thought it was all excellent.

This outcome is predictable from the X/Y/Z stuff I talked about above. No clever interpretive work is required to explain it; it arrives pre-explained; it's simply what happens by default.

And finally: because, as I noted above, I think all of us are infected with "reviewer brainworms" and we need to be mindful of this fact.

(Just to be clear, I am not accusing OP of being more infected with said brainworms than anyone else; I'm still on my soapbox, giving a generic rant about a general issue, with OP as merely a jumping-off point.)

We've grown accustomed to the casual conflation between our own tastes and some (usually hazily imagined and under-theorized) sort of "objective, ideal artistic standards."

Outside of a few edge-case eccentrics who can be ignored for my present purposes, we do not do this because we've become intellectually convinced that

(a) such objective standards make sense and really "exist" or at least really matter and

(b) they just so happen to match our own preferences.

Rather, we've fallen into this habit because it's what the pros do: there's a standard style that professional critics and reviewers write in these days, and that style implies these stances. And if one writes (and thinks, in one's inner monologue) in this style, one can easily fall over backwards into uncritically believing (a) and (b) for no better reason than "I seem to already be talking as though I believe these things, hence it would be simple and convenient if I really did believe them."

But – even if we bracket the philosophical questions of whether (a) is in fact true, and (if it is) whose tastes in particular ought to be elevated in the way (b) presumes – even if we table all that for another day, still we ought to keep in mind how weird and audacious a move this is, this simultaneous assertion-without-explanation of the (a)+(b) pair.

We've gotten used to it by exposure, because "the pros" have normalized it. But in actual fact it is a pretty wild thing to just go and assume, given the X/Y/Z/etc. diversity of actual opinion!

If (b) is true for you (general "you" not OP), then it can't be true for me, because we're both unique snowflakes to a first approximation; indeed if (b) is true for you then (to a first approx.) it is only true for you. No one else's tastes have this magical relation to reality, just yours.

Holding the belief (b) about a given reviewer is conceivable-but-wild if we're only considering them in isolation. But once we bring a 2nd reviewer (with non-identical tastes) into the picture, who also believes (b), it's literally impossible to maintain that both of these people are fully right.

And then of course in real life there are not 2 but many, many readers out there, all of them unique snowflakes. And, while it is socially normal in our social context for each one of them to write like they're the chosen one blessed with that special (b)-magic, if you read enough such writing and actually think about what you're reading, it can't help but feel like a sort of game, like playing make-believe. As with most games, it can be very entertaining (for all parties involved), but we shouldn't confuse its amusing conceits for properties of the real world.

In the real world, the writer has their tastes, and you have yours. These tastes are probably not identical. The writer may be aware of the diversity of readerly tastes, and may thus be aware that tastes like yours are out there, but they have no special reason to consider you in particular, elevating you above all the other readers who are non-identical with them (and with you). The writer is dimly and abstractly aware of you, at best, as just another one of the people who will come along later, dislike some of their choices, assume that these choices were wrong in some "objective" way the writer knew about at the time, and then speculate as to why the writer would do something they know is wrong. For every choice, and every way of making every choice, one can imagine a reviewer who responds to it in this way, and quite often these reviewers actually materialize once the work is available for consumption. If you try to reason about these guys in advance, as a writer, it'll stop you in your tracks (if nothing else because there are 2+ of them whose takes are mutually incompatible). You've gotta have some other standard of value to rely on.

So, as a reviewer, if you ask "why would someone ever make a choice I don't like?" and try to pick at this question, you are quite likely heading toward a dead end. The writer wasn't thinking about you (or people like you). They were applying their own, distinct standard of value.

Better to ask: "suppose there was a person who actually liked all of this. What would they be like? How would they be similar to me / different from me? And what, if anything, can I conclude from that?"

The Apocalypse of Herschel Schoen

My fourth novel, The Apocalypse of Herschel Schoen, is now available in full.

Merry Christmas to all, and to all a good night!

[skyscrapergods]

You probably have heard this a thousand times over but still, I adore your Skycraper God's au.

I particularly love what you did for Twilight and her ascension to God hood. For something that is more 'realistic' you gave her a destiny that feels far kinder than what she had in canon (or at least what they end up implying) and a better representation of her role as the princess of friendship. Idk I teared up a little bit when I read about her anyway your art and world building are real cool

I don't really consider skyscraper gods to be more realistic than Canon, just more fleshed out. More explored and concrete. I mean, Celestia is so massive she should have her own gravity. And anypony can supposedly become that through prayer?

Yeah. Not more realistic, simply more Explained.

Twilight's fate in the show really felt like "uhh we need more plot. I know, let's do this!" Rather than something that makes sense from a character driven perspective.

"Anyone have ideas for a bombastic finale?"

"Lots of shows have the MC become ruler so let's do that"

"Epic! She's totally queen now"

"Wait what about the current rulers?"

"Uhhh they just don't wanna rule anymore. Vacation time"

"Yeah that works. Film it"

Instead of considering what the characters do and want to do with their lives. Flurry heart sure does exist! They comment on how unusual it is for an alicorn to be born but nothing happens. She doesn't age. Doesn't even become a toddler because they didn't think beyond "baby alicorn for the toy sales"

So that's where the unkindness of canon comes from. Doing things for the hell of it and not considering if the characters would actually want it.

When I do that, and i force things upon characters that they don't want, I explore the suffering it entails. Then, I let the characters shape their destinies as much as they can, to relieve their suffering and find joy even in uncrollable circumstances. I don't just draw a smile on and say they are happy with their fates.

Happy endings don't exist. Endings in which people are happy do, but they take work, perspective, and forgiveness to achieve.

[takaraphoenix]

I truly can not put into words how much I hate the tag limit on AO3.

Look, I get it, they put it up back then for a good reason with the bullshit spam in tags. But could we lift it again? Or at least raise it to a reasonable amount?

Because 75 tags is nothing.

Not when it is total tags. Not when you are writing elaborate multiple chapter fics.

Between character tags, relationship tags and additional tags? It is so damn easy to reach 75 tags.

Hell, if you are writing am OT3 BDSM fic set in the ABOverse, you are already 17 tags in with just the core basics (3 character tags, 4 relationship tags if you tag the OT3 and the individual relationships among them, alpha/beta/omega dynamics, Polyamory, Threesome - [constellation], BDSM, 3 tags for the characters' ABOverse designations, 3 tags for their Dom/sub roles), that is not even including what kind of kinks or sexual themes will be in it and those can, depending on how much fun you're having, easily take a dozen tags too. If you also have important side characters or pairings? Or platonic dynamics that matter? And if you also have... you know... plot? Tropes or other things that would be great if findable through a tag?

I get it, 75 tags sounds like a lot. If you're posting a oneshot. But a lot of things tend to happen in longer fics. I find it impossible to contain a 50k fic to 75 tags, I have no idea how people whose stories range in the 100k+ length handle this.

If it were, at the very least, just about additional tags? If relationship and character tags weren't included in that count? I think that would actually be a more realistic number. It'd still limit spamming, but it'd also give more freedom to actually tag the important parts of the story.

Because I do want to cover the things I think are important for people to be able to filter, either to find or to avoid a story. I don't want to have to choose which thing to leave untagged, just because the story is long, elaborate and contains a multitude of themes, kinks and tropes.

[mqriuss]

He doesn't get it.

Rindou doesn't get why you've spent an hour watching people poke and play with slime. An hour.

In the past hour, Rindou has seen you doing work on your laptop and abandoning it in front of you for your phone (whether you were taking a break or done with work, he does not know). At first you were probably just looking at your friend's Instagram stories, but it quickly turned to sticky, squelchy sounds... for a lack of better word.

He couldn't help taking a peek at your phone, knitting his eyebrows together as he watched an 'egg' turn into what you were trying to convince him was slime. You show him the rest of the Instagram account and it turns out, that was what this person was known for—making slime look like oddly realistic food before completely destroying his craft with all the stretching and squishing. You're so fascinated by it, and maybe Rindou is too, but all he does is shake his head and leave you to it.

In the past hour, Rindou has done anything you could think of. He did the dishes, he took out the trash, and he checked the fridge before giving Ran a call about how they've ran out of your favourite cheese spread. He even went to take a long shower, and when he came out, you weren't jokingly whistling at his shirtless self like you usually would. You were still on that damn phone, your explore page alternating between squishy and slime videos.

"Babe, don't you still have work to do?" He finally questions you, leaning in from behind the couch you sat so comfortably on.

"I'm done with it," you answer, eyes still glued to your screen. It was crazy how much of a striking resemblance you were to the way your nephew would watch Cocomelon at the dinner table.

"Are you?"

"No."

Rindou sighs, almost chuckling. He would snap you out of it and remind you to finish whatever task you had, but with everything that's happened recently, he doesn't have the heart to at all. The turtle you treasured and loved since you were 8-years-old died two days ago, and your teammates consistently give you a hard time just 'cause. You've pulled two all-nighters just chasing deadline after deadline, forgetting to eat dinner on time and drink enough water.

He misses your smile. Even now as you're scrolling through slime videos for hours, you weren't exactly doing it with a smile on your face. Rindou jumps over the couch, situating himself next to you and wrapping his arms around your waist.

"Not gonna put a shirt on at least?"

"I don't think I'll be a distraction if you wanna watch slime videos all day." He rolls his eyes, resting his head against your chest and listening to the rhythmic beating of your heart.

You let out a little laugh at his words, and it might be the first time he's heard it this past week. Finally, you put your phone down to cradle his head in your arms, his hair still slightly wet but you couldn't care less.

"Should I buy some slime?"

"You'll get bored of it in three days."

"So, should I–"

"No, go to sleep."

[martinsharmony]

After I got a divorce I lost my job. I spent the better part of 2 years unemployed. I had to change careers because I couldn't find a job in my chosen field anymore.

I had been applying to so many jobs and written so many cover letters that I didn't know who I was anymore. I felt like I was just changing who I was to fit any job I applied to.

This thing? I can do that! That thing! Yes! That's me! Even if I didn't feel it was because I desperately needed a job. I would say anything to get it. Doing this was getting me no jobs.

I had a breakdown one day. I ended up writing a brutally honest journal entry of sorts about who *I* am. Warts and all. Basically it was a "fantasy" cover letter. One that I really wanted to send.

Here it is:

Who am I?

I'm tired of trying to make it appear that I'm something I'm not: World class, best in field, expert at everything. I'm taking a different approach. This is me, honestly. Hopefully I will be a good fit for your needs.

I love designing websites and graphics. My creative style is traditional and highly detailed, with a bit of whimsey thrown in. I have been told my designs are well suited for corporate projects (particularly internal). They are not cutting edge, but I think they are pretty good.

My technical knowledge varies. I'm expert at most Adobe products in general (particularly Photoshop), as well as Windows and PCs. My knowledge in HTML and CSS is a little bit behind the times (I'm transitioning from tables and CSS1 to HTML 5 and CSS 3), but I'm learning. I have used a Mac before but haven't for some years. I happen to love trouble shooting and I can do light tech support. There are a few programs which I do not have much work experience in per se, but I'm confident that given the chance, I will become expert. I'm not afraid to admit that I don't know how to do something and ask, or use Google to find out how.

I am loyal. Aside from the short term contract job I just worked, my average tenure at places of employment has been nearly 4 years, with the longest being over 8.

I am honest and take people at their word. I give them the benefit of the doubt and believe people and companies (managment) have good intentions. Taking advantage of people, talking people into things and "gaming the system" are not in my nature. I tend to be a bit literal.

I am easy going. I get along with most people and working with a team is one of my favorite things about working.

I am dependable. I have been called tenacious by a former manager. I do not leave tasks unfinished and I take responsibility for my projects.

I am motivated by deadlines. I once took the initiative to take control of a major compliance project in danger of missing its deadline and rescued it by completing many of the courses left unfinished and creating the rest on my own. It had a visibility of over 3000 employees.

I enjoy production and administrative work. I work well when I know what needs to be done and the task is not nebulous. I take direction well.

I can manage projects that I feel I have an ownership stake in or know a lot about. I even feel that I can grow into a leadership role and perform it well once I understand fully all the parts involved and the players. I don't personally believe in managing or taking charge of that which one does not know anything about (but I do realize that other people can do this just fine).

I am detail oriented and meticulous. I tend to catch things that other people miss. I read policies and guidelines and follow them. I once managed a complicated ongoing project that required immense attention to detail involving coordinating with 3 teams, the print vendor, multiple shifting deadlines and thousands of files. Deadline and resource management was essential.

I'm analytical. But I'm also creative. I believe this gives me a unique perspective on creative solutions for usability. I enjoy problem solving and research.

I'm not world class or the "best" at anything. Who am I to say that? I'm realistic. I try to do a good job that satisfies all the parties involved. I enjoy pleasing people and making them happy.

A short time later I applied to a job that was in a different field through the referral of a former co worker. I took that journal entry and turned it into a cover letter.

I figured what the hell. Might as well. I didn't expect to get the job.

I got the job.

The only things I removed were the phrases in pink, and I added this at the end:

I am a helper. I enjoy pleasing people and making them happy. I try to do a good job that satisfies all the parties involved.

Give me a call or email if you would like to know more. I look forward to hearing from you.

Have a great day :)

The lady that hired me eventually became my friend. Later on she told me my cover letter is what got me the interview. She said it really stood out. And when she met me, she liked me.

Reading this over again, most of these things are still true about me over 10 years later.

huge shout out to past me for making a cover letter template that i can fill in with bullshit fairly quickly. do you guys want it?

[brf-rumortrackinganon]

I'm curious to why she does not have a book deal yet. Harry's spare was a terrible read even with a well known author writing it and it still got published. It seems like every celeb has one out now. I do wonder if she pissed off some higher ups in the publishing world because I actually think her memoir would do decent numbers regardless of how bad it is.

My theory is that it's a combination of

Meghan's price for her memoirs are too high

The publishers don't think it'll sell*

There's too much liability in the chapters Meghan is shopping around that the publishers can't risk it.^

*We know Meghan bought many copies of The Bench because she used them as desk props in some of her 2020 videos and gossip from the publishing industry is that Spare hasn't sold enough copies to pay for Harry's advance which means that Harry actually owes PRH money.

^It's standard practice in the publishing industry that when one publishes a memoir or a nonfiction to run the book by legal and/or by others discussed in the book to protect themselves. Legal can advise chopping out whole sections if they think it'll expose them to libel and slander (which we know happened to Harry in Spare because he's talked about cutting hundreds of pages) so if this is something that they'd be concerned about in Meghan's memoirs, I'm guessing it's about 'he said-she said' interactions with the BRF that they can't substantiate and in Meghan's case, because there's so much public evidence contradicting her narrative (just look at the 17 claims in Oprah that the Daily Mail debunked), her liability risk is pretty high.

I do agree with the anon that Meghan's memoirs would actually sell decently - not the blockbuster sales of the Obamas' memoirs but I bet she'd do better than Spare. Granted, most of her sales are going to be people who want the inside gossip on the BRF, but she's also going to get the Hollywood/entertainment crowd and the race relations crowd.

I think the only way Meghan will get her memoirs published is if she knocks her price down to something more realistic. I've always thought the memoir will come after a divorce, when she's desperate for money and can not only tell stories about Harry too, but also stories that would otherwise piss him off.

But that said, if Meghan's show does well, she could probably get a lifestyle/home and garden book deal out of it (think something like one of Martha Stewart's books or Pippa's book) and if that book does really well, like 'exceeds expectations' well, she could get her memoir published.

[eusuntgratie]

as a certified mom(tm), what's the most common thing people get wrong when they write children?

ooooh i love this question! (adding certified mom to the resume STAT btw)

i think the MOST common thing people get wrong is the realistic development/representation of a child at a certain age. i see lots of fic where a three year old is speaking in full sentences, where an eight year old baby-talks all the time, where a six year old has literally no concept of what is happening in their life. i saw a good tumblr post that was a great resource for writing kids by age that i'll see if i can find. but with how many moms are on tumblr, i think just asking them... how would a five year old talk? or how would a ten year old handle this type of situation? would be a great start.

there are other things that are always jarring for me as a parent that someone who doesn't spend a lot of time with kids might not notice or care about.

the first is that your (young) kids are ALWAYS around. you are literally always responsible for where your kid is and what they are doing. if they aren't with you, you've made a plan for where they are, how they'll get there, when you'll pick them up, etc. there are exceptions of course (people living on huge pieces of land or in neighborhoods where they know everyone are more likely to have their kids running around and might not know exactly where they are, some people have multigenerational households and have a lot of help). but even in those cases, the parent still knows and is responsible for that kid. there's nothing wrong with writing a kidfic that isn't realistic just bc its cute or you like the trope. but as a parent its jarring as hell to have a character introduced as a parent (especially a single parent!) and then the kid is never around. i promise you that man is not fuckin' or going on dates as much as you want him to be 🤣 or if he is, it took a LOT of work or he has a LOT of support.

related to this, every parent i know is exhausted. if their love interest isn't attracted to their eye bags or letting them sleep instead of waking them up for sex, get outta my face. the sexiest thing a partner could do for a parent? LET THEM SLEEP.

related, we do fuck with kids in the house. (cough cough chris going on sleepovers 3x/week in fic 🤣). its okay. you can make keeping quiet sexy. you can lock the door so you'll hear it if they need something without traumatizing them. you can use a baby monitor to keep an eye or ear out. we don't wait until our kids leave to have sex, or some of us would hardly ever have sex.

a few random notes and i'll wrap up. kids aren't (and shouldn't be put in the position to be) solving their parents problems for them. most kids won't immediately trust a new adult, especially if that person is dating their parent and their other parent is still in their life, even if they really like that person. a parent would not leave their child with their brand new love interest unless they had literally no other option. i have some issues, but there are very few people i trust to be alone with my kid. someone i don't know well would never make it onto that list.

lastly, parents fuck up. we aren't perfect. i try really really hard to break generational shit, to do better, to be a good mom. i've read lots of books, done tons of therapy, found great resources, done parenting groups, i consult with other parent friends and friends who work in mental health about challenging situations. and i fuck up all the time. kids, even great kids, are little assholes sometimes. nobody's perfect, and that's okay. nobody's kid is a perfect little angel 24/7 and nobody is a perfect parent.

my askbox is always open and i always love to talk about writing! thanks for this it was a fun question to answer <3

[acourtofthought]

Did you catch the latest podcast with Steph and Ava? They absolutely crack me up! The biggest takeaway for me? They both agree that Azriel's book is next. Meanwhile, the Elriels are being suspiciously quiet about it. But hey, a clickbait piece or song by Taylor somehow holds more weight, right? 😂

Sure, Steph and Ava could be wrong, but let’s be real—neither of them is losing their minds over some random “articles” or Taylor Swift lyrics. They actually know SJM personally. I mean, whether we like it or not, they have a better insight into her than any of us do. What do you think?

I definitely think they're a lot of fun together and I agree, in terms of credible news sources I would think if there's any insider knowledge to be had, it would be Steph over a random ScreenRant journalist. That her statement "not everything is meant to be taken romantically" was possibly a message to e/riels because of how they read into everything but beyond that I am a bit divided on what Steph and Ava actually know or, what they know versus what they're saying.

To me it means something that Steph was all on the E/riel train even when she and Sarah spoke about the Az bonus chapter, where Sarah told her she was excited for her to read the crumbs she scattered. Then later, they had done an IG Live where it still seemed Steph thought E/riel was a possibility and Sarah's face seemed to fall a bit but just a short time later Steph no longer though E/riel was happening. Something like that does make me wonder if Sarah told Steph that E/riel wasn't going to be a thing because there was a noticeable shift between Lives in who she thought was ending up together.

In terms of them knowing who the next book is about, I'm not sure whether they have insider knowledge. Since Sarah kept the HOFAS crossover a secret from even Josh, it's possible she's also keeping the main pairing of the next book a secret to those around her as well. Steph and Ava do think Az is next but Steph also mentioned she felt HOFAS was needed in order to build Az up to have his own book and that seems a bit odd to me. An ACOTAR series character should not need an entirely different series in order to set him up for his own book since not every ACOTAR reader will read CC. So what happens for those readers, they buy the next ACOTAR book completely confused as to where Az's story came from when they left off with SF? What if those readers only read the series because they were able to check out the books from their local library and they have no idea that his bonus chapter exists? I think the next story has to make sense for readers who stopped at SF and are not aware of any bonus chapters or what happened in CC because despite our immersion into this fandom I don't think the majority of readers are into all things SJM the way we are. A casual reader should not be obligated to read beyond the ACOTAR books in order to pick up the next book in the series and understand what's going on and Az processing a time traveler who took his dagger when starting the next book is a bit of a stretch for where things left off in SF. Especially when CC did not actually leave us with any new and immediate threats for them to deal with. Where we left off in SF was the peace treaty, Koschei, Beron and Spring as immediate concerns (they didn't sound like things that could wait another 6-9 months so Az can first deal with his stuff) and Emerie joked the Illyrians would be in hysterics for decades (an Az storyline) meaning not an immediate concern. When the big bad starts making moves in a Sarah book, things move pretty quickly from there on out. I.e. We learned of Hyberns plans in January and the war occurred in August. I think the TOG series occurred over a year. In SF, we learned of Koschei and the Trove in September / October and SF ended in April. So I'm not sure it makes sense to have an Az book (my guess is you'd need at least 6 - 9 months for a realistic love story if he's ending up with Gwyn) then at least another 6 months for an Elain book and for us to finally see Koschei's defeat. That stretches out the Koschei / Beron plot well beyond her norm.

With that said, maybe Steph does know something but if she did, would she say it? That would be breaking the trust of Sarah and Bloomsbury. Knowing something then saying "but it's just my opinion" still kind of spills the tea if you've been forced to sign an NDA. Usually if people know secrets they avoid the topic entirely. Or maybe Steph knows something but she says the opposite to throw people off so she doesn't reveal secrets. In the podcast she also said that if Az and Elain don't end up together, she doesn't think Lucien and Elain are ending up together but that Lucien still can't have his story until Elain deals with her bond and to me that's a strange thing to say. If Elain isn't ending up with Lucien or Az then who is she sharing a book with? And how would we get an Az book, then an Elain book THEN Sarah tackles Lucien's story? How are we dividing the current plots between the three, all with three different love interests? Ava also said she couldn't remember Elain stabbing the King so again, are they just messing with us or are they just too busy with other stuff to actually dive deep into these books the same way we do? Which is completely understandable, they seem to be extremely busy with everything else they have going on, I'm just not sure how much of what they say should be written as gospel.

With all that said, I do think it's possible for Steph to know something but at the same time I'm not sure that what she's saying is her revealing the information she knows. I think it would cross a line to have insider information then share that insider information on podcasts while saying "it's just my opinion" to cover yourself.

However, she's also mentioned a few times that she tells Sarah not to spoil anything for her so I end up divided on the topic.

[silverhypnos]

So, I think I may have an unpopular opinion here, but it's easy to look at child Chrollo and assume the only reason why he made the choices that he did was because of the traumatic event. However, I always viewed Sarasa's death as the final straw. It's extremely subtle, but one thing that doesn't get addressed but is implied is the passive abuse Chrollo goes through as Meteor City's golden boy. The way how the elders talk about this kid is alarming to anyone familiar with child psychology. Most people only recognize abuse when it's something extreme, (like Killua's situation).

With how quickly Chrollo decided that in order to make sure a death like Sarasa would never happen again, and that both he and Meteor City needed to change in the process. While we as a viewer never get to see it, it heavily implies the reason why he was able to come to this conclusion is because the adults were already putting this thought in his head. I believe the elders have a nasty habit of being complacent and pushing the responsibilities and the burden on the bright youth.

(Even Phinks recognized that the elders aren't actually making real changes to that affect Meteor City) Chrollo was most likely showered in praise for being such a smart boy, but it came with the caveat that the adults were subtly pressuring him to become the savior of Meteor City. This is a form of grooming. Children aren't supposed to be expected to fix problems made by adults. While others can excuse this kind of grooming as Meteor City doesn't have resources to allow kids to develop healthily, it doesn't change the fact that this is a kind of abuse. For who knows how long, Chrollo has got it in his head that it's his responsibility to fix things. That when Sarasa went missing, it was somehow his fault.

I believe that Chrollo was already going down a less ideal path before Sarasa's death due to the subtle abuse and the pressure from the elders. So, for me, if a younger version of Chrollo (Pre-Sarasa) were to see the current version, I don't think his first thought is he can't condone current Chrollo's actions. I think he'd be afraid of what happened to make him go so far. I think he'd theoretically want to say that he couldn't condone it, but deep down he may have already adopted a utilitarianism complex but hasn't had the motivation to push him to it. yet. Trauma changes people, but I have a hard time believing he hadn't thought about how Meteor City needed some form of defense against human traffickers before Sarasa's death. Especially since all of the children knew about it. Before Sarasa's death, I wouldn't be surprised if Child him wished there was a hero that could save Meteor City. Just like in the power cleaners, but afterward, realistically, there weren't resources for anyone to be the hero. That's why he chose to be the villain.

sometimes, i wonder what the old chrollo would say if he could see himself today.

[keepthedelta]

it's not that i trust the rumours but i do think it would be funny for checo, daniel, liam and yuki (in my heart if not reality, fuck you red bull) to have spent the last two years fighting over the second red bull seat, two different drivers getting fired mid season in an attempt to find someone good, only for red bull to decide to go with franco, who has even less experience than liam lawson and has never been affiliated with red bull in his life

[morphestic]

Pardon the controversial thought with the Mafia-ADA exchange

but what if I want to see Dazai go back to the port mafia? Contrary to what other people say, I think it'd be really interesting because 1) no it wouldn't be throwing his character development in the trash. My guy has healed, he's going back to the same dark place but as a different person, being in the mafia wouldn't make Dazai break the promise he's made Odasaku and 2) Mori still has the thought that Dazai can come back, that he's fit to take his seat. I want him to prove Mori wrong, he can't be the Mafia boss and his blood isn't just mafia black and no, he's never belonged in the mafia to begin with. And maybe I also want to see the amount of headaches he can cause everyone, just for fun.

[bixels]

tarpit site.

[littlesparklight]

I think - to throw in my thoughts here - the thing for me is that it's a balance between insisting the ruins we now call the site of mythical Troy totally wasn't (mythical) Troy and insisting it totally was. Because I sure am annoyed by the "DID THE TROJAN WAR ~REALLY~ HAPPEN???? and did this site experience a war at the time the Trojan war was said to happen??" sentiment (academic and non) whenever I see it around. Hilarious, but come on now. As we know it (even the most "realistic" of realistic versions) of course it didn't. Archaeological and what little textual history in Hittite sources that have been preserved do not agree, or would only put any sort of east-west/Hittite-Ahhiyawa conflict at Wilusa at much earlier than even the earliest timeline ancient scholars gave us, I believe.

On the other hand, the mythic reality of Greek myth is... very much embedded in their landscape. The springs, rivers, at least a number of the cities - they do and did exist, still now (if in ruins) and in Antiquity. Mythical Athens might not have existed, but the real-life Athens is still the physical "anchor" for the mythical city and the heroes attached to it.

The same goes for the location of Troy. Like, there was an agreement about and belief in where mythical Troy "had" been, and that's (as far as I understand it) is where the ruins of Wilusa is, pretty much.

But also, mythical Troy is of course a mythical construction. Mythical Troy didn't exist, but that doesn't mean the Ancient Greeks didn't imagine a very real physical location for it.

I don't know if it proves or confirms anything for me, personally, that that particular spot in the ancient Troad is where mythical Troy was. But given that very same "embedded in the landscape" quality, it feels... "important"(? something??) to have that spot to relate it to the physical location of Greece itself, etc.

i guess what i fundamentally don't understand about the "was troy real?"/"they found troy!" pop-culture media cycle is exactly WHAT does it prove or corroborate? in WHAT way would a place have been "the real troy"?

[trans-axolotl]

saw a post the other day that said that psych survivors were overexaggerating and fearmongering for saying that people should be aware that having diagnoses on your record can be a danger + impede your life. and the more i think about it the more annoyed i am. because i think people need to know that there are exceptions to health privacy laws that can make having psych diagnoses and psych hospitalization history on your record risky depending on your circumstances. diagnoses follow you through your health interactions-you do not have to consent to have your information shared between providers. judicial proceedings are also an exception to the HIPAA privacy rule, so for things like custody battles, guardianship, getting orders of protection--the court can petition for medical records. there's so many other situations where even if they can't legally access your information without your authorization, people will require you to disclose diagnoses, records, previous hospitalizations and refuse to give you services/hire you/whatever unless you share that information with them. for example in many states anyone (a provider, a cop, friends and family) can disclose that you have certain psych diagnoses like bipolar to the DMV which then might require that you undergo drivers license review as frequently as every 3 months. my university is actively trying to kick me out right now because i had to disclose my medical record, psych diagnoses, and hospitalization history to them as a requirement to stay enrolled.

and i don't want to scare people or make people think that having a diagnosis on their records is automatically going to mean that it is weaponized against us. because i do know plenty of people who have never faced issues with their records. but i do expect that the community supports the people speaking out about the ways that we have been harmed by diagnoses creating barriers to accessing necessary parts of our life. instead of attacking us or saying that we're lying about things we are currently experiencing.

[ghost-proofbaby]

can y'all please come into my humble abode and imagine something with me i don't yet have the wits to write a full fledged fic out of (yet)?

so, everyone knows how when you get a tattoo, part of the healing process is the itchy phase, right? and for obvious reasons, you can't scratch it. favored method, in my experience and fellow tatted friends, is to just give it a good old slap.

perfect. so now, with this in mind, can you imagine having gotten a large hip/ass piece, and how mortifying it would be to smack your own ass to soothe that itch? and it's just plain painful. you want your new ink to heal properly - it's gorgeous and you put a lot of time, pain, and money into that damn thing - but it just sucks.

enter best friend eddie.

he loves your new ink. thinks it's fucking sick. nearly creamed his damn pants when he found out you were doing a hip/ass tatt (because how can he ask to see it without being weird? how can he react to that without being weird when he's spent the last several years with the world's most pathetic crush on you?) at first, it's fine. you show him the tattoo in a totally friendly, totally platonic way. he hypes you up, he calls you 'the most metal person he knows'. flourishes you with all the compliments and looks at you with starry eyes out of sheer awe at the way he's managed to snag a person into his life who is just so. damn. cool.

but the days pass by, that new ink begins to heal, and it fucking itches.

when you first proposition him, you're even more embarrassed than he is. stumbling over all your words, the request coming out contorted every wrong way. you don't want to make things weird, but is it really that weird for a friend to help a friend? it is really that weird to ask your best friend to smack your tattoo to help with that itch you can't even really properly reach?

it's just friends helping friends.

and that's the mantra you both repeat to yourselves - as you request the embarrassing favor of him, as he agrees almost too eagerly, as you find yourself face-planted in your bed wondering how deeply you can bury down your shame as he tries to make jokes to make it all a bit less awkward.

it's just friends helping friends, until eddie's hand lands down on your ass with a resounding smack, and that first little whimper escapes your lips.

[p4nishers]

there's something i need to say and yall can boo me for it but deep in my heart i'll always know i'm correct: crowley already forgave aziraphale. like already would take him back at one flutter of his eyelashes. that's all.