#so I don't know quite how cynical Will is or isn't about Normal's future

[babacontainsmultitudes]

[just venting a bit into the void you understand you understand 😌] Lately I've been feeling very caught between "I have a lot of thoughts on Sparrow and Normal and all that with the ending and teen talk and feel like I need to get them out and voice them for my own piece of mind and resolution" and "I am lacking the strength and energy to actually sit down and write it all out and kind of really just want to fully move on to other things (AUs, fics, anything else)" but my brain can't seem to commit to either and that's quite frustrating cause it's just left me very restless. *Sigh*. Idk! Just needed to complain about that a bit ig, it's silly but this is what has been ailing me as of late.

[parismystere]

after the reference to the sleeping beauty do you think the theory of a 5 season without adrien is true? i hope not because it would be boring as the sixth season of teen wolf without stiles

actually, this is not the first reference to adrien as the sleeping beauty the show has made! thankfully, you're a normal human being that isn't hyperfixating on a show for 7-year old girls and don't have to remember it.

once upon a time... back when chloe still had a redemption arc... we got this moment in 'style queen':

so, my biggest worry as of today isn't exactly that adrien is framed as a princess/sleeping beauty, because adrien's entire narrative is deeply feminine-coded, but that the show would end his story with being saved by another character (you may guess who). last week i might've been super cynical about it, but today i liked the new episode a lot so i'm cautiously optimistic that... they won't go there? please don't go there?

now that we've gotten that out of the way, the creators have confirmed that season 5 is the end of the agreste arc, so it's reasonable to not worry about adrien's place in the show until then! i've cautiously speculated, however, that seasons 6 and 7 might be adrienless. there is this post about gabriel's future post-defeat that i chimed in, and you can see more ideas in the notes!

the biggest problem, the way i see it, is that ml is at its core still a quite light-hearted show, even if it has been bold and heavy in some moments and is currently moving to a more complicated narrative than the simplicity of, say, s1-s2. so they'll give us scenes about adrien and gabriel's relationship, but will also make them subtle enough so that it isn't too much, you know? the real question is how the show can continue, especially if it intends to keep its light tone, when we have a 14-year old child that will lose its family and will have to live with the knowledge that his father is the villain he's been fighting all along? and we're not even talking about the twin rings, felix, emilie's involvement and so on. that's just the tip of the iceberg we're hitting. how can the show be faithful to adrien's emotional burdens without dumbing them down or glossing over them, and still continuing to, well, exist for the little kids? some say that we might get a time skip and aged-up character. i personally speculate that adrien might get even less screentime or be a little... written out of the show, as the show builds some magical storyline around marinette (more on that in the post i linked!). and i don't want to, because... honestly... adrien/chat is the star of the show? that might be the most absurd 'shooting yourself in the foot' moment ml may have.

i really wish that i could say with certainty, anon! i wish i was able to be 100% sure and assure you that, yes, you will get your catboy for as long as ml airs. i'm sure that MANY in the fandom will be able tell you that. but i also want to be honest with you - i, personally, am a little worried, and i'm preparing myself for it (the way i'm not preparing for sentiadrien lol), in case it happens. but really, you shouldn't listen to me, i don't have any insider knowledge! you should really make up your own mind instead.

[elizabethfraser-va]

Link: https://www.vam.ac.uk/blog/caring-for-our-collections/refashioned-recycling-in-the-vas-textiles-fashion-collection

Questioning how repair could also mean 'refashion' or 'repurposing' -> linking past, present and future?

How can 'repair' be extended? Can it? Does it simply mean an effort to restore something to its former condition or extending its lifespan, as its previous purpose isn't relevant anymore?

I want to question how things we wear from the past can be changed and modified to fit the current ideals of whatever time it happens to be in, which can cynically be seen as 'restoring' it to 'what it should be'. Therefore, how much leverage do we as humans really have over the natural changes that occur in the process of ageing and damage due to use or time? No matter how much we try to reverse the effects of change, does this really do whatever we are trying to restore justice? Or is it the 'moral' thing to do?

Garments and clothing can be considered a second skin. We are the only species on earth that use an external material to cover ourselves up everyday, and this is purposed for weather, practical use, aesthetics and self-expression. So, repair and restoration in clothing is a very important matter to many, however more so to civilisations without access to mass-manufactured and consumable garments, such as people in the 16th century. Skills of repairing garments has been lost slightly due to this, mainly in the western world, however it has gained some increase in people wanting to extend the life of their clothing due to environmental concerns.

What's crazy is that repairing clothing was a normality to most people in, for example, 19th century England, and even wealthy individuals did not have many clothes. Therefore, there was more of an emphasis on repairing your clothes wherever you can. There were also the values of society that influenced this. For example, during WW2 people were encouraged to salvage their clothing into anything practical and repair when necessary, and clothing rationing was a huge reason for this. Today, when buying new clothes is something that is persuaded and a normal part of 'modern' society, repair simply isn't exactly needed. The most I have done to prolong the life of a crappy, bad quality H&M t-shirt was cut it shorter and make it look more 'trendy'. I have also sewn quite a few shirt buttons, often with different coloured thread (so how much is it really repairing it when it just changes it more?)

There's also a weird element of elitism when it comes to this kind of stuff. It appears things have switched: from a time when almost every poor peasant in the country had to know how to repair their clothing (and it was embarrassing to see that you had repaired your clothes), to now when it's almost seen as a trendy, hip thing to do. People who actually have time to repair their tattered clothes, who by the way might already be good quality fabric enough that they are salvageable, usually have a slightly privileged attitude to this job. It can be seen as a pleasure, something that might not even be necessary. On the other hand, this is a very good thing. The more people trying to prolong their garments' lives is only helping decrease how much garments contribute to waste on the planet. Furthermore, why shouldn't repairing your favourite jumper be a pleasure? Doesn't this only contribute to producing less waste? Is this attitude also an elitist attitude?

But this also ignores how much we actually know about the way our clothes are made. It's a comfort to us to not know, really. We don't want to know what really happens in the factory. We can afford to turn a blind eye.