#so of course people are going to go in like 80 different directions with his character

[cluescorner]

Some people: Kaeya’s bio father is an abusive monster who abandoned his son in order to achieve his own selfish goals. He is an evil man who deserves everything awful that might happen to him. 

Other people: Kaeya’s bio father did the right thing and leaving Kaeya in Mondstadt was the only way to give him a halfway-decent life. He is a better father than he is given credit for and should not be as hated as he is. 

Me: Kaeya’s bio father is integral to the general ‘war is hell and bad choices can reverberate across time’ thing that Genshin seems to be going for. He made unethical choices, but mostly because the ONLY OPTIONS HE HAD WERE UNETHICAL. If our understanding of the Alberich’s role in Khaenri’ah is accurate, General Alberich (my name for him until stated otherwise) was suddenly in charge of a hopeless and dead kingdom which begged to be saved. Assuming that there was a reason Kaeya specifically was chosen for this mission, General Alberich was forced into a position where he needed to choose between the lives/future of every Khaenri’an vs the life and future of his young son. Abandoning either is an awful thing to do and a horrible decision, but the bad decisions of Celestia and Rhinedottir have led to a scenario where General Alberich can only make bad decisions. In the end, he chose to prioritize his people and made his young son into a spy. We do not know the process for this, but knowing how much Hoyoverse loves to torment people (especially Khaenri’ans) we can assume that this process was horrific for Kaeya and could definitely be considered abuse. General Alberich is effectively making his son into a child soldier for a war that the majority of people never wanted or asked for, and one Kaeya was likely far too young to understand. At least, until he was forced to grow up far too quickly in order to fulfill his duty. General Alberich likely loathed everything about what was happening and even in his last moments with his son he asks for forgiveness. He knows that what he is doing is wrong, but to turn back now is to both abandon his subjects and make everything that happened to Kaeya in order to turn him into a child spy be for nothing. So yeah, General Alberich is a terrible person who made horrible choices. But war and the bad actions of others have created a situation where he has nothing BUT horrible choices and where being a terrible person is the only thing he can be. And that’s without considering how the curse/abyssal corruption could impact the scenario. 

[mashkaroom]

Translation thoughts on the greatest poem of our time, “His wife has filled his house with chintz. To keep it real I fuck him on the floor”

It’s actually quite tricky to translate. Because it’s so short, each word and grammatical construction is carrying a lot of weight. It also, as people have noted, plays with registers. “Chintz” is a word with its own set of associations. Chintz is a type of fabric with its origins in India. The disparaging connotation is from chintz’s eventual commonality. Chintz was actually banned from England and France because the local textile mills couldn’t compete.

Keep it real” is tremendously difficult to translate -- it’s a bit difficult to even define. It means to be authentic and genuine, but it also has connotations of staying true to one’s roots. Like many English slang words, it comes first from AAVE. From this article on the phrase:

“[K]eeping it real meant performing an individual’s experience of being Black in the United States. As such, it became a form of resistance. Insisting on a different reality, one that wasn’t recognized by the dominant culture, empowered Black people to ‘forge a parallel system of meaning,’ according to cultural critic Mich Nyawalo...The phrase’s roots in racialized resistance, however, were erased when it was adopted by the mostly-White film world of the 1970s and ’80s....Keeping it real in this context indicated a performance done so well that audiences could forget it was a performance.This version of keeping it real wasn’t about testifying to personal experience; it was about inventing it.”

One has to imagine that jjbang8 did not have the origins of these phrases in mind when composing the poem, but even if by coincidence, the etymological and cultural journeys of these two central lexemes perfectly reflect the themes of the poem. The two words have themselves traveled away from the authenticity they once represented, and, in a new context, have taken on new meanings -- the hero of our poem, the unnamed “him”, is, presumably, in quite a similar situation.

Setting aside the question of register, of the phonology, prosody, and meter of the original, of the information that is transmitted through bits of grammar that don’t necessarily exist in other languages -- a gifted translator might be able to account for all of these -- how do you translate the journey of the words themselves?

In my translations, I decided to go for the most evocative words, even if they don’t evoke the exact same things as in the original. The strength of these two lines is that they imply that there’s more than just what you see, whether that’s the details of the story -- what’s happening in the marriage? how do the narrator and the husband know each other? -- or the cultural background of the very words themselves. I wanted to try and replicate this effect.

Yiddish first:

זייַן ווייַב האָט אָנגעפֿילט זייַן הויז מיט הבלים

צו בלייַבן וויטיש, איך שטוף אים אופֿן דיל. zayn vayb hot ongefilt zayn hoyz mit havolim.

tsu blaybn vitish, ikh shtup im afn dil

This translation is pretty direct. There is a word for chintz in Yiddish -- tsits -- but, as far as I can tell, it refers only to the fabric; it doesn’t have the same derogatory connotation as in English. I chose, instead, havolim, a loshn-koydesh word that means “vanity, nothingness, nonsense, trifles”. In Hebrew, it can also mean breath or vapor. I chose this over the other competitors because it, too, is a word with a journey and with a secondary meaning. Rather than imagining the bright prints of chintz, we might imagine a more olfactory implication -- his wife has filled his house with perfumes or cleaning fluids. It can carry the implication that something is being masked as well as the associations with vanity and gaudiness.

Vitish -- Okay, this is a good one. Keep in mind, of course, that I’ve never heard or seen it used before today, so my understanding of its nuances is very limited, but I’ll explain to you exactly how I am sourcing its meaning. The Comprehensive Yiddish-English Dictionary (CYED) gives this as “gone astray (esp. woman); slang correct, honest”. I used the Yiddish Book Center’s optical character recognition software, which allows you to search for strings in their corpus, to confirm that both usages are, in fact, attested. It’s a pretty rare word in text, though, as the CYED implies, it might have been more common in spoken speech. It appears in a glossary in “Bay unds yuden” (Among Us Jews) as a thieves cant word, where it’s definted as נאַריש, שרעקעוודיק, אונבעהאלפ. אויך נישט גנביש. אין דער דייַטשער גאַונער-שפראַך --  witsch -- נאַריש, or “foolish, terrible, clumsy/pathetic. not of the thieves world. in the German thieves cant witsch means foolish”. A vitishe nekeyve (vitishe woman) is either a slacker or a prostitute. I can’t prove this for sure, but my sense is that it might come from the same root as vitz, joke (it’s used a couple of times in the corpus to mention laughing at a vitish remark -- which makes it seem kind of similar to witty). I assume the German thieve’s cant that’s being referred to is Rotwelsch, which has its own fascinating history and, in fact, incorporates a lot of Yiddish. In fact, for this reason, some of the first Yiddish linguists were actually criminologists! What an excellent set of associations, no? It has the slangy sense of straightforward of honest; it has a sense of sexual non-normativity (we might use it to read into the relationship between the narrator and the husband) -- and a feminized one at that; it was used by an underground subculture, and, again, the meaning there was quite different -- like the “real” in “keeping it real” it was used to indicate whether or not someone was “in” on the life (tho “real” is used to mean that the person is in, while “vitish” is used to mean they’re not). It’s variety of meanings are more ambiguous than “keep it real”, which can pretty much only be read positively, and it also brings in a tinge of criminality. Though it doesn’t have the same exact connotations as “keep it real”, I think it’s about as ideal of a fit as we’ll get because it’s equally evocative of more below the surface. I also chose “tsu blaybn vitish”, which is “to stay vitish”, as opposed to something like “to make it vitish” to keep the slight ambiguity of time that “keep it real” has -- keeping it real does< I think, imply that there is a pre-existing “real” to which one can adhere, so I wanted to imply the same.

The rest is straight-forward. “Shtup” is one of a few words the Comprehensive English-Yiddish Dictionary (CEYD) gives for “fuck”, and I think it has a nice sound.

Ok, now Russian

женой твой дом наполнен финтифлюшками

чтоб не блудить с пути, ебемся на полу

zhenoy tvoy dom napolnin fintiflyushkami.

shtob ne bludit’ s puti’, yebyomsya na polu

In order to preserve, more or less, the iambic meter, I made a few more changes here -- since Russian, unlike Yiddish, is not a Germanic language, it’s harder to keep the same structure + word order while also maintaining the rhythm. I would translate this back to English as:

“Your house is filled with trifles by your wife. To not stray off the path, we’re fucking on the floor”

So a few notes before we get into the choice of words for “chintz” and “keep it real”. To preserve the iamb, I changed “his” to “your”. This changes the lines from a narration of events to some outside party to a conversation between the two men at the center. Russian also has both formal and informal you (formal you is also the plural form, as is the case in a number of other languages). I went with informal you because I wanted to preserve the fact that his wife has filled his house not their house, as someone pointed out in the original chain (though I don’t think that differentiation is nearly as striking in the 2nd person) and because it’s unlikely you’d be on formal you with someone you’re fucking (unless it’s, like, a kink thing). I honestly didn’t even consider making it formal, but that would actually raise a lot of interesting implications about the relationship between the speaker and the husband, as well as with what that means about the “realness” of the situation. Is, in fact, the narrator only creating a mirage of a more real, more meaningful encounter, while the actual truth -- that there is a woman the husband has made promises to that he’s betraying -- is obscured? that this intimacy is just a facade? Is there perhaps some sort of power differential that the narrator wishes to point out? Or perhaps is the way that the narrator is keeping it real by pointing out the distance between the two of them? there is no pretense of intimacy, the narrator is calling this what it is -- an encounter without deeper significance?

Much to think about, but I actually think the two men do have history --  i think the narrator remembers the house back when it was actually only “his house” and was as yet unfilled with chintz. We also don’t know what they were calling each other prior to this moment. This could be the first time they switched to the informal you. 

Ok moving on, I originally translated it as “твой дом наполнен финтифлюшками жены”. Honestly, this sounds more elegant than what I have now, but I ultimately though removing the wife from either a subject or agent position (grammatically, I mean) was too big a betrayal of the original. The original judges the wife. She took an active role in filling the house. If she were made passive, that read is certainly a possible one -- perhaps even the dominant one -- but it could also read more like “we are doing this in a space filled with reminders of his wife and the life they share” -- the action of filling is no longer what’s being focused on. Why do I say the current translation is inelegant? I feel you stumble over it a little, because it’s almost a garden path sentence. This is also an assset though. “Zhenoy tvoy dom napolnen” is a fully grammatical sentence on its own, and it means “Your house is filled by your wife” -- as in English, the primary read is that the wife is what the house is full of. If the sentence makes you stumble, perhaps that’s even good -- we focus, for good reason, on the relationship between the two men, but in a translation, the wife is able to draw more attention to herself.

Ok, chintz: I chose the word “финтифлюшки” (fintiflyushki), meaning trifle/bobble/tchotchke, because it, allegedly, comes from the german phrase finten und flausen, meaning illusions and vanity/nonsense. Once again, I like that the word has a journey, specifically a cross-linguistic one.

Keep it real: this one, frankly, fails to capture the impact of the original, in my opinion, but allow me to explain the reasoning. “Stray off the path” implies, again, that there is some sort of path that both the narrator and the husband were on before the wife and the chintz -- and one they intend to continue taking, one that this act is a maintenance of. It brings in a little irony, since the husband very much is straying from the path of his marriage. “Bludit’“ can also mean to be unfaithful in a marriage (as, in fact, can “stray”). The proto-slavic word it comes from can mean to delude or debauch -- they want to do the latter but not the former.

As for register -- “shtob” is a bit informal. I would write the full version (shto by) in an email, for example. The word for fuck, yebyomsa, is from one of the “mat” words, the extra special top tier of russian swears, definitely not to be said in polite company (and, if you are a man of a certain generation or background, not in front of women; it’s not that the use of mat automatically invokes a male-only environment, but if we’re already thinking that deeply about it. But while we’re on the topic, i will say that in my circles in the US, women use mat much more actively than men (at least in front of me, who was, up until recently, a woman and also a child).)

Ok i think that’s all the comments i have!

[bambi-kinos]

Would you like to answer a few questions about you opinions about Paul. Peoples read him very different and of course as a human he too has good and bad sides. What are the things that stands out to you the most: pros and cons besides being icon and music genius. Not from beatle historians or anyone else's opinions just your personal views? In the Beatles, pre and post Beatles. How do you view him today vs from decades ago? (Don't know how long you've been a fan) do you think he's mostly happy or sad in private. I'm asking you this because to me you seem like the one on line blogger that seem to "get him". Also would you say that you are attracted to him? Have you seen him live? What are you favourite songs by him both as a Beatle and beyond. I'm a super-Paul-stan fan and proud of it and nothing you say can change my own opinions of Paul but because nobody is perfect. Ok I'll let you go now.

Had to think about this one for a couple of weeks.

My opinion about Paul is that most of positive and negative feelings towards him are earned. He deserves the reverence but sometimes people take it too far like when his stepsister Ruth called him a god with feet of clay or whatever lmao. That kind of behavior is incredibly cringe and its very embarrassing that people can talk that way about Paul. But I think that he's busted his ass for over 60 years so truthfully he's earned the accolades and praise that he gets. There are some people that get really pissy and mad that he's revered so much and the only thing that we can say to them is "get a fucking life." Paul McCartney has been working his shapely ass off for decades to get where he is and is still slamming out music at in his fucking 80s. When you accomplish half as much as he has than you can think about whining that he's too revered and too worshipped.

On the other hand Paul has done a good job of earning all the negative emotions directed at him. He's egotistical and isn't graceful about wearing that praise. He tries to pretend he doesn't care but it's so transparent and see through that it's actively irritating, I think it's this more than anything that can get people to bitch. There is a phony veneer to Paul where he's clearly doing a bit of some sort and it's aggravating because it's not entirely clear what the bit actually is. Like all the posts making fun of him for pretending to be """normal""" are not coming out of no where, it's real aggravation that he's worked his whole life to get where he is and he tries to go "heehee I don't actually want it I'm just a guy like you <3~" like cmon dude really. For fuck's sake.

When it comes to Paul himself, my take on him, idk. I identify with Paul heavily. I like to think I'm more aggressive than he is but who actually fucking knows. I went through a life changing trauma at a similar age. (I was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes when I was eleven years old which is the insulin dependent diabetes that you hear about a lot on social media. BTW if anyone else has diabetes type 1 or 2 I'm available to talk, my dad and my partner are both type 2 and I know a lot about both.) I can identify with how your life is heavily bifurcated between Before and After. I also identify with how Paul really struggles to come to grips with his family life, while it's clear Jim and Mary did love him a lot they also simply were not stellar parents and a lot of their success with Paul and Mike lies in the fact that they gave their sons a steady home life without chaotic disruptions more than that they navigated the trials of parenthood well. I identify with that as well because diabetes makes my life very chaotic, and my parents did work to smooth those things over; but on the other hand my folks also had nasty and ugly moments with me just like Jim did with Paul. So I know what its like to love your parent immensely and be loved by them and still have a deeply resentful and distrustful relationship with them. And I never had a John Lennon in the mix to disrupt things.

I think it left me and Paul in similar places though our birth order is reversed with him being the oldest and me being the youngest. I realized a long time ago that I was completely on my own in terms of my diabetes and the rest of my life (my mother made some treatment decisions about my diabetes that nearly killed me a few times before I took control of it completely.) A parent can love you immensely, try to do everything right, and still damage you profoundly. With Paul having to endure physical blows and attempted emotional manipulation from his father, I think he too realized that he was totally on his own and that Jim could not give Paul what he needed. That is why Paul has such a strong self preservation instinct and why he comes off as two faced and why MLH remarked that he did not want to be in a dark alley with Paul if Paul did not like him. I've had to do some nasty things for self preservation and I think Paul has had to do it too. Some of them we know about but the majority we never will.

I think that it's hard to be the first born or the last born kid. You get so much of your parents attention but they screw you up in so many ways. I know middle children tend to feel ignored but I'm going to tell you right now, you're being shielded from a lot because you're not getting the Eye of Morder trained on you. Maybe we should all be thankful for what we have, idk. I have a lot more in common with my oldest sister than any of my middle siblings.

Paul is ruthlessly out for himself. I think John dying actually changed that a bit, it made him somewhat less vindictive and he was more open to letting people in but he's never not going to protect himself first. Or else he wouldn't have married Nancy in the first place, Nancy's first cousin was Barbara Walters and through Nancy Paul has a direct line to the news media which means he has yet one more string of influence so that he can control his public image. Nancy and Paul like each other a lot and their relationship is sincere, but Paul also benefits greatly by it. Do you see how this goes with him lol, he can invest in sincere relationships (and to be clear he does love Nancy) while still benefitting from it materially and immaterially. Note that a lot of the negative stuff about Paul started fading out of the press after he married Nancy.

Other fans often think I'm being negative and hateful about Paul when I point out that he is a manipulator and that he has a ruthless streak in him but that can't be farther from the truth. I sincerely admire Paul's ability to arrange his life in such a way that he is safe from most tangible threats and that he has such a way of moving chess pieces so that his hand isn't visible. I find that a great deal more admirable and amazing than John's bluntforce "let me squawk like a chicken to a reporter and they'll shit on Paul for me because I took a photo with them" thing. John was very blunt and clumsy with his sledgehammer and that did get results but I think that Paul is a great deal more artistic and beautiful with his media manipulation. The fact that he can carefully line up his pieces, get the results he wants, and then his influence is never seen (unless you extrapolate your way backwards from the results) is, to me, a great deal more elegant and sophisticated than the Lennono approach to bloviating during interviews.

Paul learned this during the initial Beatlemania rush when he had scads of heterosexual men all on their hands and knees begging him to let them fuck him. He does things exclusively through dangling something people want in front of them and then lets them take a course of action that suits him. And despite the fact that he is the architect of these movements you can never trace anything back to him because he does everything through influence and suggestion, not by out and out coercion or bribery. It's actually kind of incredible. Last week my friend remarked "I think Paul could pull off a bank heist and never get caught" and she's right.

That's what I admire about Paul. That is what I think is beautiful about him. Not necessarily the music or the lyrics or the insane life. Just the fact that he is a very patient and careful human being that doesn't lose his cool easily. I want to know more about him because I want that, you know? Being able to control facets of my life with that much care and harmony.

But that wasn't always the case. Paul was very clumsy during the 1970s because he let his feelings rule him when he should have crushed John like a bug. It wasn't until after John died that Paul started building the fortress, that was when he finally realized "oh shit, I need to build a persona for PR. I can't just be me anymore." Wings Paul is in some ways the most honest Paul, he vomits his feelings everywhere and we get a lot of insights into his mind and home life. That was before he had formed his own network of influence and political chicanry. 1980s Paul is when he's investing in that network finally and then 1990s Paul is when he started putting it into motion culminating in the divorce with Heather Mills. All in all I find it fascinating that Paul was not able to pull these disparate parts of himself together until he was in his 40s and Linda died. What is to be done with such a man?

I think that Paul has always had disparate parts of himself that he hasn't been able to reconcile. This is of course not unusual, it is the work of our lifetimes that we must see, accept, and internalize our contradictory natures. It's Paul's bad luck that he has to do this all in the public eye. No one envies him that. It's hell on earth and my heart breaks for him sometimes.

When it comes to Paul's moods in private, I think he is more or less "happy." Paul himself has said that he doesn't overthink his actions, he just decides what he wants to do and does it and whether it pans out or not is a different matter. I think that he's the kind of person that doesn't ruminate and he doesn't overthink what he's doing. And if he does do that then he goes to his guitar and does the "tell it all my problems" thing which is actually music therapy. It clearly helps him a lot and it clears his head so that he can keep his problems in perspective. I do that with journaling and my common place book, and I should do it more. It clearly helps Paul which is a good habit to have. All in all during his day to day life, Paul is happy and accomplished and has a big family with lots of grandchildren. Clearly loves Beatrice to bits and would do anything for her. The fact that we never hear anything bad about Beatrice is proof that she inherited all the right things from Paul lmao, she knows better than to get in trouble. Interestingly I think Beatrice is Paul's mini-me and considering Heather Mills is the same kind of personality as John Lennon, it makes me think that John and Paul having children together would actually have worked out very well for them.

On the other hand we know that Paul carries his share of anger and bitterness and old grudges. "No one knows the real me, do they." We're lucky that we live in a time where we can be relatively open about our personalities as well as our wants and needs. Paul did not grow up with such privileges and is only just recently starting to feel his way to the place we have inhabited our entire lives. He's suffered greatly for it. He's a naturally reticent person but I think John Lennon is the only person in the world Paul could fully express himself with; even Linda did not get full access to Paul considering comments made by others about Paul's controlling nature which belies anxiety. Why was Paul anxious around Linda, his soul mate? Because there were still parts of himself he didn't want her to know. And so on.

I think that in some ways Paul's lack of rumination and cheeriness is a choice that he's made for himself. He's been "tired" of negativity and hurtfulness for pretty much his entire life, he's always wanted to bring light into the world. John once said that Yoko painting "yes" on the ceiling of her exhibit was what he liked about her because it was positive, unlike the self absorbed 'woe is me' bullshit exhibits other avante garde people put up. I think John was attracted to Paul for similar reasons. Paul tries to take the sad song and make it better. Paul transformed John's life and he saved John from a much harder and painful path like the common belief that John would have landed himself in prison if he hadn't met Paul. I don't think it would have happened precisely that way but it was certainly a distinct possibility that John was aware of and he knew that Paul saved him from it.

Paul does it for himself as much as anyone else. I think he's actively trying to avoid the traps that many of us fall into. Rumination, bitterness, regrets. These are things that poison a person's life and even without therapeutic language Paul realized that he didn't want his life to be consumed by it. That doesn't mean he doesn't have his well of pain to tap into but he wants to live and be happy. He said once that John wouldn't want him to be hurt and depressed and he was right. I think if we all approached our lives with that kind of attitude, "I deserve to be happy and I'm going to do what it takes to get there," we would all be much better off. Paul is a role model in more ways than one.

Paul is a sport, a one off. There is no one else like him and when he dies there will never be anyone like him ever again. Treasure him now while he is here.

I have never seen him perform. When he has his next US tour then I'll go, I don't care what it costs.

Am I attracted to him: yes and yes. I find it more like an aspirational attractiveness but I think he's intensely beautiful and he became more beautiful as he aged (though there is something very special and breedable about 22 year old Paul McCartney. It's deeply depressing that he never got pregnant.) That's different from being handsome, all of the Beatles were handsome but Paul is intensely beautiful. It's the kind of thing that gets memorialized in Sumarian poems. If we were told he was descended from swan maidens or something like that, it would not be a shock. There's a story in that somewhere lol, imagine Paul bathing in a lake and John steals his feathered coat so that Paul will marry him or something like that. IDK. Paul is very intense.

Beauty is sovereign. Beauty triumphs over all things. Paul is one of those rare people that handles (almost) all of his affairs adroitly. Every little thing he does is magic.

I'm a big fan of all of Paul's work, I genuinely enjoy London Town for instance and I don't get why some circles make fun of it. Synth owns what is the problem here. Some of my favorite Paul songs:

With a Little Luck

Probably my favorite "John, I love you, I'm sorry, please come home" song. It's just very Paul, the very carefully arranged harmony, the minor key in an upbeat tempo, with the almost mismatched lyrics before Paul brings it back to a major key resolution. It makes me want to find my partner and kiss them on their lower lip. (My partner has a very pouty lower lip, easily one of their best features.)

Let 'em In

I have an entire animated music video in my head about this song. I've actually been looking up how to teach myself art because I want to pursue it. First learning to draw, then learning to animate and all because I want to animate this sequence I have in my head. Oh Paul. I adore you.

Rock Show

This one actually made me stand up and dance around my house which never happens anymore. I just love the energy and Paul's silly voices. And Paul's platonic fascination with axe wielders rears its head again! I wonder if Paul ever fantasized about killing people with an axe.

Another Day

This is the anthem of my life lmao. At least I have a romantic partner but we're long distance until I can emigrate to the United Kingdom so again I identify very heavily with this Paul piece. Ahhh…

When it comes to Paul's Beatle work, I don't really want to reference anything there because Beatles music was such a community effort, even Paul's songs aren't fully his once the other three got their hands on it. That's not a bad thing but it does mean the Beatles were an engine unto themselves. Paul never had full control of his songs. My choices are not particularly enlightened but they are true which is all I can provide.

This was a really great ask to get, thank you for sending it in. Very flattered if I'm someone who "gets" Paul. I think it's more like he makes a lot of sense to me and it's very rare that he does something that does not make sense to me. I'm probably projecting a lot but we all do that so who cares?

[hyp-fixator]

Misc. Headcannons as a little treat and also cause I'm bored. (Most are region based!)

Hyperlaser tends to like writing as a coping mechanism. He keeps everything in a single storyline in a book that will forever stay a work in progress. ^ All it is is him putting his life into a different perspective. Most of the time I feel like the book would be pretty boring, just a day after day after day kind of thing. Noticing the little patterns around him, noting down what he eats, how he rested, etc.

All demon horns, if expressing strong emotions, can emit sparks and/or electric currents in the direction of growth. These sparks are harmless and are more of a pulse of light if anything. ^ if strong emotions are felt and the demon has injured/broken horns, the sparks/electricity can escape through the injury, and depending on the severity can cause a sparkshower. ^ these sparks also crackle like static electricity, while the glowing pulse going up the horn(s) is a faint hum. (This is partially inspired by horns glowing when the Phighters phinishers are ready, though when that happens it's kinda like when you go into a rage in dnd. A bunch of built up power erupts and the horns pulse so fast they look like they're glowing)

And now the faction headcannons!

BlackRock is a tourist attraction most of the time! With the mountains and valleys, it tends to feel a lot like Banff National Park in Canada. ^ tons of expensive as hell food, shops, ect all meant to trap and drown people.

Blackrocks economy is the worst out of all the factions. Many people have to eat only a few times a week, and when they do, it almost always tastes like gasoline and/or dirt. Of course, with the tourist traps, no one knows unless they move there how bad the cuisine is. They probably steal recipies from neighboring factions.

All of Blackrocks labs are built into the largest mountains, the only way in and out being the massive steel doors.

BlackRock was of course named after the mountains in the region, which are made out of a slick black rock. The most common tourist souvenir is a piece of this rock from the mountains.

there's of course the more mountainous places in BlackRock, but most of the population resides in the center of the faction which is protected by the mountains surrounding the massive city like a bowl. ^ this city resembles downtown japan and New York times square, but x100 more busy and advanced in their technology.

this city tends to only be visited by the tourists who are dead set on going, as it's not very tourist friendly with its inhabitants and the stores are more than expensive. Their cornerstores arent even that good either.

BlackRock doesnt celebrate anything, and is more secluded when it comes to their culture.

At playgrounds center is just an urban town, always resembling one of those classic movies based in the 1970's/80's. ^ the outskirts of Playground is a massive and dense forest system, where plenty of secrets are held. Most of them are hideouts though.

Playground is a heavily community based faction, and it doesnt have many big cities. The capital is one of the only cities, and even then many still prefer the towns and neighborhoods scattered across the faction.

There's also a few large lakes around the faction, so beach culture is a fairly big staple.

Playground doesn't usually celebrate a lot of things as a whole faction, and more rather everyone has massive parties and celebrates with their own family and friends. Party-hopping happens quite a bit because of this

The thieves den is the second most visited faction, and the calmest of them all. A permenant fog covers the ground, giving it an almost eerie feel, though it fluctuates with the weather.

Community is also a fairly big staple, though it's more in business then personal connections. ^ there is plenty of farmland and tons of street markets open almost all the time.

The Thieves den, without much competition, easily has the best cuisine out of all the factions with all the freshly grown and harvested ingredients, along with talented chefs.

The capital of thieves would most likely look a lot like those old chinese towns, but I wouldnt be suprised if theres a bunch of Korean inspiration in there as well.

Festivities are not very common, but when they do happen, Theives den goes all out with some of the most light and decoration crazy celebrations. Most times the capital holds it, and almost always it ends up being the whole city decked out to celebrate.

The theives den also has plenty of bars and pubs/hotels scattered around the faction, and they all reside fairly close to each other.

The lost temple is the driest faction of the four, residing in small towns around a massive desert, usually based around water pools and oasis.

Most of the buildings are made of sandstone and chiseled with delicate details.

Of course the church of the true eye resides somewhere in the capital, most likely hiding behind a different name.

Lost temple is probably the most menacing faction specifically for how uneasy the air around it is. Naturally theres some very nice and safe places and experiences to go to, but if you take a wrong turn it's very easy to end up in the wrong side of town.

markets are also fairly common, every other street has at least a few stalls up daily.

the more populated areas are definitely a little more "yee haw cowboy" esque, having taller buildings and such.

[unordinary-diary]

Blyke and John: Parallel Characters

I’ve written multiple entries about this,

[x] [x] [x]

But I’m back to make a comprehensive analysis about the glaring similarities between these two. I’ll try not to repeat myself here.

‼️SPOILER WARNING for the whole series‼️ but this mostly focuses on the story before John’s suspension.

Firstly, this scene:

ch. 121

This conversation takes place near the beginning of the Joker arc. It’s after John targets Zeke, after he targets Juni, and the day before he goes after Seraphina’s kidnappers. The timing is important.

“If someone hit your best friend, would you let it slide?”

That question is supposed to remind us what John does to people who hurt Seraphina: hunting them down and sending them to the hospital. Blyke shooting a destructive beam really close to John was an example of a trait they share: they both blow up violently when people mistreat their friends.

John’s downward spiral carries strong themes of hypocrisy. He’s angry at the world, he’s angry at himself, and as a coping mechanism, he chooses to believe that everyone else is as bad as he is. That means that most of the traits he hates others for are the same things he hates about himself. In this scene, Blyke is unintentionally calling out this hypocrisy: “What I did is no different from what you do”.

But Blyke’s just trying to connect with John here, he has no idea what John’s been doing. And John, of course, doesn’t give a shit about what Blyke has to say. This line was here for the audience to notice.

They’re both so similar, but their similarity immediately causes tension between them because, well, John was on the wrong end of Blyke’s protectiveness.

I really love the way this was written— there are so many flashbacks to this scene, but they remember it differently. John remembers the part that hurt him— he’d describe it as “the time that jackass shot a beam at me”. Blyke remembers the part that hurt him, or rather, hurt Remi: “the time that jackass hit Remi for no reason”.

Blyke and John are both hotheaded characters with strong ideals. They’re similar enough that Seraphina points it out:

(ch. 80)

As Blyke grows as a character, he becomes more like John: sticking up for low tiers and speaking out against the injustice in the world. But while Blyke is doing that more, John is going in the opposite direction, until they are fully opposed to each other.

Speaking of Blyke’s character arc, it took me a few rereads to actually understand what part of him changed. His kindness, selflessness, bravery— all of those things were there from the start. Blyke’s character arc was about becoming more aware of his surroundings, and how his carelessness can harm others. Blyke was never malicious, but after X-Rei and integrating more with the school, he becomes aware of people suffering around him and how he unintentionally contributes to it. He becomes less reckless, privy to the flaws in the system he grew up not questioning, and uses his power more responsibly. He even comes up with a more controlled way to wield his ability. The part of Blyke that changes is his maturity.

Part of John’s character arc is also about being careful. It’s not as close of a parallel as other things are, but one of the things that John works on during his redemption arc is holding back. Both of them learn self-control throughout the series, and for John, that means acting early before his emotions spiral out of hand.

Adding onto my first point about the two of them wanting to protect their friends— the fact that they can’t do that makes them both angry and desperate. For most of the story, the “block” that prevents John from protecting Seraphina is in his head. It’s his own trauma that holds him back. The block that prevents Blyke from protecting his friends is, guess what? Also John’s trauma! Parallels abound.

Another thing I noticed in Episode 80 is this:

Notice that when Seraphina says “I’d take that over strength any day,” John is looking at the camera. He’s avoiding Sera’s gaze. Seraphina is saying she prefers honesty over strength. John is very strong, and very dishonest, but Seraphina thinks the opposite because John is so dishonest. John appears to be reflecting on this disconnect.

In relation to this analysis, Seraphina is actually pointing out a major difference between Blyke and John. Beyond that, she’s praising Blyke’s traits, (less strong but very open) above John’s traits, (strong as fuck but a liar with his pants on fire). Furthermore, John really cares what Seraphina thinks of him. Knowing that she would think less of him is the main reason why he spent so much time and effort preventing her from catching his lies.

This leads into my main point here: Blyke is the “goody-two-shoes” version of John. Or, more accurately, the person that John wants to be. Blyke has a clean track record and doesn’t really get into trouble. He is respected and left alone by the school without being hated and feared, he de-escalates conflicts without taking things too far, he doesn’t lose control, he’s someone Seraphina thinks highly of, hell, even his grades are better! Blyke represents everything that John wants to be, and the person that he could have been if he’d gone down a different path.

But, crucially, John is also what Blyke wants to be. Well, not wholly, but his ability? His strength? It’s one of the things John hates about himself, but Blyke wants that strength so desperately that he risks his life for it over and over again.

They’re both desperate to be like each other, even when they hate each other the most. Neither of them have any idea how alike they already are.

I don’t know what Season 3 holds in store for us, but I do hope that John realizes that Blyke embodies who he wants to be, because mutual jealousy would be a very interesting dynamic to explore in my opinion. I also hope that it ends up being something they can bond over, by helping each other accomplish their personal goals. (Blyke being another helper in John’s character arc, and John helping Blyke train.)

A side note: John beat up Blyke four separate times. That’s more than any other character, which is interesting because John’s main rival is supposed to be Arlo. For reference, John has beaten Arlo twice, three times if you count the time when Seraphina intervened, and he only beat him unconscious once. But John beat Blyke to the point of passing out all four times, the worst of which being a shot clean through his chest. (shoulder? Unclear. S1 finale).

It’s odd, isn’t it? Out of everyone, Blyke is the one who John physically hurt the most. John’s only grudge against him is an old memory from episode 33, of an event that didn’t actually harm him. John’s grudge against Arlo is much more serious and again— that’s his main rival. So why is it that he’s so much more violent towards Blyke?

The problem here is that I’ve been thinking about these fights as “John picking on Blyke”. And that’s… kind of true? But while Blyke didn’t start any of these fights, they were all consensual in a way. He didn’t seek to fight John, nor was he ever happy about fighting John, but he was always a willing participant.

(138, 153, 206, & 211)

In three out of these four fights, John didn’t even expect to be fighting Blyke going into it. This is significant because while Arlo is John’s main rival, John absolutely fills that role for Blyke. Blyke’s own agency is what leads to most of these events. The reason, narratively speaking, why they fight so much is not for John’s character, but for Blyke.

For John, his reason for fighting Blyke so much is not narrative but moreso symbolic. John is angry at everyone and everything, but ultimately the person he hates the most is himself. It’s only fitting that the character most like him would bear the brunt of his wrath.

As John is having his positive character arc (suspension and post-suspension), he is becoming more like Blyke, and the two of them reach a point where they’re even more similar than they were at the start of the series.

In the Rowden amusement park, John does start to realize how similar they are:

(249)

Additionally, I want to draw your attention to the parallels between this scene:

Blyke and John’s argument in chapter 249

(which the image limit won’t let me add, scroll until you see red hair.)

And this scene:

Argument in ch. 121 (it’s at the beginning)

Two sides of the same coin.

Furthermore, in the S2 finale, Blyke is shown being taken to Keon. There is an implication that by Season 3, Blyke and John will share Keon-related trauma as well. Despite my pessimistic predictions, I do hope that this is a similarity that can bring them together rather than tear them apart.

[darkmaga-returns]

Thoughts in the Immediate Election Aftermath

The Prudentialist

Nov 06, 2024

"The demons cunningly withdraw for a time in the hope that we will cease to guard our heart, thinking we have now attained peace; then they suddenly attack our unhappy soul and seize it like a sparrow."

- St. Isaiah the Solitary

As the Associated Press has called the presidential race for Donald Trump, (with Kamala yet to emerge to offer a concession speech, at least at the time of writing this) I’m left with a huge shit-eating grin on my face. However I can’t say it’ll last forever, chasing a high from so many years ago will never be quite the same once you get a hold of it again. I sent my vote for Donald Trump during early voting, and if you include the primaries (and for the sake of disclosure) I have voted for Donald Trump six times now with this election being the last. I had voted for a bull in the china shop in 2016, thinking he would be safer in terms of foreign policy over Hillary Clinton, and my politics moved further to the right as I saw the bureaucracy, the media, big business, etc., rally against him and people who voted for him. 2020 of course happened, but we’ll get into that later on today.

And here we are.

The results as of this morning:

While the Spirit of 2016 crackles through the air like the spirit of radio did in 80s and the glass ceiling still stands without a crack, the nagging feeling of “I’ve been here before” lingers in my mind. Trump and his supporters have been called Hitler, fascists, racists, all the rest, and have seen conservative aligned businesses targeted, and any elite defections have lawfare and the like as Elon Musk and his companies have. Had the economic conditions been better, had the borders not been opened up for millions to pour in and to get better treatment than actual Americans, the constant preference for the foreigner over the citizen, the mandates, the inflation, all of it…this election could potentially have gone a different direction and this isn’t even mentioning the attempts on Trump’s life.

There are some key items as to how we got to here, in no particular order.

Biden dropping out of the race.

Elon Musk’s purchase of Twitter (now X.)

Kamala’s poor quality as a candidate

Rampant inflation

Foreign Policy (Shipping Lanes, Israel, Ukraine)

Regime preference for foreigners

Lawlessness/Anarcho-Tyranny (Law and Order)

Open Borders - Every State a Border State

Countless more factors are included, but one thing that I think is really worth mentioning here is just how millennial coded this election was, especially for Kamala’s campaigns. From “Brat” to her appearance on the “Call Her Daddy” Podcast, her staffers going on TikTok to talk their “MAGA Uncles” as if they were literal preschoolers shows us that the mid-thirties schoolmarm schtick wasn’t going to sit well. Kamala was a piss poor candidate in 2020, and was already tied to an unpopular (and illegitimately elected) President Biden, and her lack of policy positions and presupposed “vibes” weren’t going to go far enough when the average person’s quality of life had gone down, costs have gone up, and the worship of lawlessness meant what they did have was very much at risk especially in urban areas. California has opted to be tougher on crime based on the results of Prop 36.

[deansmom]

The fact that the spn fandom is entirely incapable of a nuanced discussion involving Dean and the relationship with his mother shouldn’t surprise me as much as it did when I came back to fandom, and as much as it still does when I’m forced to see it with my own two eyeballs

Mary Winchester was a person before she was a mother, and I’m going to be so honest with you, I think by the time she died, John didn’t like who that person was. So I think when she died, he did what a lot of people do, which is put the person they lost on a pedestal. And that’s who Dean grew up hearing about, that’s what all of his memories of his mom were contextualized with, this person who didn’t exist. And so then his mom comes back and I think it’s very, very clear to Dean almost immediately that this isn’t the same person John told him about.

In the real world, we have no context to draw from and nothing to compare it to, the experience of getting a dead parent back and to be part of your life again. We can’t know how he felt beyond what we were shown in canon - So of course Dean is thrilled, but he’s also a Winchester and deeply traumatized, and tries so hard to make it seem normal and not internalize his complicated feelings about her and her being alive. He’s dealing with:

Grappling with losing the mother he was told she was and resenting mary for it because she’s standing in front of him

Realizing that John robbed so much from him by denying him the version of his mother who feels like looking in a mirror

The guilt of how and why mary is there

Trying to reconcile his feelings of resentment and anger that he knows should be directed at John, but John’s not there, so they end up getting directed at mary, and feeling bad about that

A deeply traumatized inner child who has his safe person back, and just wants his mom to hold him and tell him it’s going to be okay, but he knows that isn’t fair to ask of her

And meanwhile mary was dealing with

✨trauma✨ from being brought back to life

Having to confront her own failures as a parent (which is silly it’s not her fault she died but y’know, feelings tend to be silly)

Having to reconcile her toddler with the man in front of her who’s older than her being her son

Seeing so much of John’s worst qualities in both of them and recognizing the trauma of a shitty dad

The fact that they had this idea of who she was, and it’s nothing like her at all, and trying to understand why John would lie to them while also probably coming to terms with what looks like confirmation of her own worst fears about who she was as a parent

I cannot stress this enough: the last time her feet touched the ground, she had been married, with a new baby, and a 4 year old, she wasn’t a hunter, John barely knew about hunting, and it was the 80’s. She woke up in what, 2017 and her husband���s dead, her babies are grown men (again: older than her!!!) and the most prolific hunters in the world. Oh, also, angels? God? The afterlife?? Funny story! Like I’m sorry, you wanted her to have well-adjusted coping skills for that????

The Mary hate just gets me because she’s Dean in a different font, and so many of y’all hate her for such superficial bullshit that you could let go of if you took 5 seconds to think about the situation critically for both of them. The only bad guy here is, was and will always be John Winchester. John was there, but Mary tried her best. Mary tried to do what was best for them when she left, because she didn’t want to damage their idea of who she was anymore than she had. Mary literally died trying to save Sam from the destiny that heaven had written for him - John couldn’t be bothered to think about his kids.

And if you think that Dean ever genuinely hated Mary, your critical thinking skills need some work. The thing that prompts his speech in 12.22 is Mary saying to his younger self, “I only want good things for you, Dean. I'll never let anything bad happen to you.” So he says

I hate you. And I love you. 'Cause I can't – I can't help it. You're my Mom. And I understand...'cause I have made deals to save the ones I love more than once.

I forgive you. I forgive you. For all of it. Everything. On the other side of this, we can start over, okay? You, me, Sam. We can get it right this time. But I need you to fight. Right now, I need you to fight. I need you – I need you to look at me, Mom. I need you to really look at me and see me. Mom, I need you to see me. Please.

Translation: “you’re right. I resent you for not being the person I was sold, I resent you for your death being the thing that ruined dad, I resent you for being the touchstone for so many of heaven’s plans for us. I resent you because you’re here, and John isn’t, and it’s easier to hate someone tangible than someone dead. And if I hate you, it’s only because I can see so much of myself in you, and I’m so incredibly angry that John treated us the way he did. My whole world, my whole identity revolves around you being someone that you never were, and wrapping my head around that is scary, but when I pull my head out of my ass and look around, you were just a kid. And you did your best, you’ve always tried to do what’s best for me and Sam, and I don’t hate you. I don’t know if I like you right now because you’re a stranger, which is scary - but I love you. So please, mom, I’m sorry that I’ve been taking my bullshit out on you. Just… try. For me. Please.”

Anyways!!! You guys don’t deserve Mary.

[ffverr]

Hey I love Warren and Emma together but removing Monet's position and replacing her with a white woman who isn't really involved with X-Corp in your X-Corp idea is kind of a bad decision when you think about race for more than 5 seconds. But then again this happens in real corporations all the time if you're striving for realism.

I completely agree! That's why Monet is not removed at all!! ( I love her way too much to do that)

I had done a reblog while still brainstorming to talk a bit about Monet and Roberto da Costa's involvement and I am of course acutely aware of the optics.

I'll explain all the lore in much more finalised character profiles, but for the moment:

X-corp is based on a four way, equal shares leadership. So basically, a four person board! Which includes Warren, Monet, Emma and Roberto all on a 25% basis.

I think it's much more fun, accurate and interesting that way! (They're all very experienced, so it makes sense they all get major positions)

They all handle different departments of activities though.

So despite being Co-Co-Co-Co CEOs, they specialise in a specific activity:

Monet is in charge of handling the international aspect of the company. So the different branches all over the world. She coordinates all of that business and travels a LOT abroad to make deals, exchange etc... I think this plays on her strengths as a very well traveled, polyglot who's very good at imposing her vision and handling tough situations.

Roberto is where we go more into headcanons. In canon, Roberto has always been fiercely attached to justice. He's always been big on arguing and standing by his positions! ( Standing up to Xavier since age 13!) + I believe that he would be a bit turned off by his father's greed and quickly get bored of numbers so he would rather handle more strategic and problem solving aspects of the company. Naturally, I believe he became a very successful corporate lawyer! So he's head of the legal affairs section of the company.

Warren is still kind of the face of the company, being the most "famous" of these four. In canon, he has a business mind but I'm looking to orient him a bit more towards a creative direction. So if anything he's handling the creative direction/ administration aspect of the company! Basically: "what else can we do or add to make this better?"

Emma with little explanations needed is handling the finances of the company (in tandem with her very very tired head of accounting Bobby drake)

This all sounds serious, but I promise, this is much more of a gag AU that will be 80% meme redraws and like 20% nice illustrations If I can manage ☠️

Like, Warren got intensely obsessed with ecology and has a secret zoo in the basement archives. Emma keeps trying to fraud her way out of expenses and Roberto is STRESSING trying to keep her in line (bobby is also absolutely exasperated by her shenanigans).

Monet is a zoom princess! They go without seeing her three weeks at a time and wonder if she's not taking secret vacations... (She isn't! She's the most hardworking member of the team, she just mixes efforts with pleasure in an efficient way)

The comic cover divide of Warren and Emma and Monet and Roberto is purely based on age basis and potential crackship romantic plots! (I find it very very weird for people to ship Monet and Warren together, and let's be honest, Monet is Roberto's type to a T). And I'd like to add that this quartet all have very fun dynamics together! The potential is endless honestly, this is the "we're better than you and we know it" team. But will they be able to work together? 👀 We'll see!

Obviously, more to come, but as a preview, the extended cast is very interesting! We have Boom Boom, Karma, Kyle Jinadu, Northstar, Iceman, Sage, Windancer, Kwannon, Trinary and Prodigy all doing fun stuff!

P.s, all info about this can be found under the "trans-axion" tag which is the nickname of this au.

[hawkinsschoolcounselor]

It's so annoying to see people in the tag comparing Byler to other queer ships that didn't happen like no Byler is unique and wasn't made by bad writers. Idk if you were in one of those fandoms but it would be amazing if you could explain to all those people why Byler was written differently because I am tired of the classic: "they are queerbaiting you,deal with it". I am like :" wow they queerbaited the Lgbt+ community and the heterosexuals too then because a huge majority of the GA audiences who see Byler aren't from the Lgbt+ community". They also made the "main" ship do unlikeable that it lost at least 40% of their supporters between season 3 and season 4.

Well, I can see where they're coming from, even if I don't agree.

I have never been involved in a fandom before, but I have been a fan of shows/movies where I thought "so and so would make a good couple" only for nothing to come of it. I've said it before, and I'll say it again, though. This is the first time I've ever thought it was going to happen, and I've felt that way since season 2. Each season since has left me disappointed, as I don't want it to be a final episode "twist" in order to avoid losing fans, but it's still only become more and more obvious to me that it's inevitable.

I think a lot of fans get caught up in headcanons, particularly between seasons. As a result, they end up forgetting what is actually canon, and they create elaborate predictions that just don't fit the reality.

Yes, queerbaiting is a thing. I'm not familiar with many of the fandoms that this is used with, but I'll give the fans the benefit of the doubt on it. If a show hints at a queer couple, that's not enough for it to be queerbaiting. But if they continually build it up, only for it to go nowhere, then it might be. If they actively use it as a means to market the show, then it definitely is.

Without knowing more about specific fandoms, it's hard for me to make any direct comparisons. I suppose, should, somehow, Byler not be endgame, then I'll probably understand a lot better. However, I will also be extremely confused and will have lost considerable respect for the Duffers as writers.

However, Byler is a unique animals, as far as I can tell. It's something that has had seeds planted to it from the very beginning of the show. It's not some response to fans that the producers felt they could then exploit for marketing/merchandising purposes. It may not have been obvious back in season 1, but the clues were there. There was no retconning done to make Byler fit. There was no sly stoking of the flames in the fandom to get fans excited about it. That all happened organically as more and more people caught on.

I don't think the Duffers are dumb. They built a slowburn same-sex romance between main characters over the course of an entire top-tier series. As much as it annoyed me that it's taken this long, it does make the most sense, both in-universe and as a matter of mass appeal. Both the fans and the characters themselves had to come to terms with teen boys falling in love in the 80s. That's not something to be rushed if it's to be taken seriously.

Will, the one we've been told was gay, has come to terms with his feelings, only to come to the conclusion that it's not meant to be.

Mike, the one we've seen to have more-than-friendly feelings for Will, is still not ready, yet.

Season 5 will be the catalyst for Mike to realize what his deep feelings for Will really mean, so he can show Will that love is something for him to experience.

[d-criss-news]

Darren Criss Comes to Little Shop of Horrors with Disney Fandom and a Yen for an American Crime Story

“Suddenly Seymour” from Little Shop of Horrors is, of course, one of the great musical ballads. Beginning with feather-light piano and words of reassurance that are nearly sung-spoken, it grows and grows and grows—much like the plant the story revolves around—ending with a finale so rousing it could probably be heard in outer space.

If there’s one guy who knows his way around “Suddenly Seymour,” it’s Darren Criss. Among his countless performances of the song, he has sung it with Lea Michelle on Glee, on Carpool Karaoke and, most recently, on stage at Carnegie Hall. “There's never a point where I roll my eyes at it or go, ‘Oh god, I can't. I have to play this again,” he told Broadway.com Editor-in-Chief Paul Wontorek on The Broadway Show. The song is “bulletproof."

The number hits a little different lately. In January, Criss stepped into the role of the downtrodden flower shop assistant Seymour Krelborn in Little Shop of Horrors off-Broadway, with Evan Rachel Wood (Westworld, Across the Universe) in the role of the similarly put-upon Audrey. “‘Suddenly Seymour’ suddenly has a narrative context. It's not you and me at a piano bar having a couple beers singing our favorite song. It comes from a real narrative place. It's nice when you are doing the show in context, telling the story.”

Despite a deep love of the musical, Criss never thought he’d play the role of Seymour. “I can't say I ever sat around going, ‘Oh, one day I'll play Seymour'—I just never saw that,” he said. “But here we are and I'm doing my damnedest.”

Criss is especially delighted to be sharing the stage with Wood, a close personal friend. As Criss reveals, he personally asked Wood to join him in the show. "I can't take full credit for it, but yes, I may have nudged it," he said. A couple of weeks into their run, audiences are buzzing about the pair. “Listen, come for me. Stay for Evan Rachel Wood. She's the chef's kiss. I'm just the amuse-bouche that you forget about by the end.”

"'Suddenly Seymour’ suddenly has a narrative context. It's not you and me at a piano bar having a couple beers singing our favorite song." –Darren Criss

Not that long ago, Criss played Andrew Cunanan, the handsome and tormented real-life killer in The Assassination of Gianni Versace: American Crime Story. Weirdly, Cunanan’s story is not worlds away from that of Seymour Krelborn—another killer feeding insatiable appetites (albeit those of a monstrous plant). “I seem to have a thing—I don't know what it says about me—about playing men that will go to extraordinary lengths to accomplish greatness,” said Criss. The stories of Cunanan and Krelborn “have the same sort of parable to them, of the consequences and cost of obsession. There's only so far you can go before really bad things happen to the people around you and to yourself.” Seymour Krelborn: American Crime Story, anyone?

The crucial difference is that Little Shop of Horrors is enormous fun and packed with catchy doo-wop tunes. A lifelong Disney fan, Criss is also enjoying reveling in his love for the late Howard Ashman who, as well as writing and directing the original off-off-Broadway production of Little Shop of Horrors, was a central figure in the Disney Renaissance of the late ‘80s and early ‘90s. Before his death in 1991 due to HIV/AIDS, and in partnership with musical chameleon Alan Menken, Ashman brought tremendous heart and intelligence—and a Broadway sensibility—to The Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast and Aladdin.

“As the kids say, he’s like my Roman Empire,” said Criss. (Chatting before the formal part of the interview, Criss suggests that “Mushnik & Son,” with its minor-key Klezmer vamp, is a prequel to “Poor Unfortunate Souls” from The Little Mermaid, while the fizzy frolic of “Closed for Renovation” anticipates “Something There” from Beauty and the Beast.) “I spend a lot of time thinking about Howard Ashman. My whole life, he has been such a North Star in the way that I think about creating things as an actor, as a writer, as a songwriter, as a lyricist—anything. I never had the pleasure of meeting him. But anytime people ask me: ‘Dead or alive, who'd you have dinner with?’ I always say Howard Ashman. I pretend he's in the audience every night—sort of as a barometer of what I think he would like or not like."

"'Being in this is my own little contribution to the altar of Howard Ashman."  –Darren Criss

As an example of Ashman's exquisite dramatic instincts, Criss points to the well known video of Ashman directing Jodi Benson's vocal performance of "Part of Your World" for The Little Mermaid. "If this show [Little Shop] is like proto-Disney Renaissance—if this show is the beginning of Little Mermaid and Aladdin and Beauty and the Beast, which had such a profound influence on my life—then there are so many pieces of those things in the show that I'm tipping my hat to that it's hard not to feel connected to him in some way every night. It's an extraordinary legacy that I've been so obsessed with my whole life. Being in this is my own little contribution to the altar of Howard Ashman.”

Criss is already looking forward to sharing his love of Disney (and all things Howard Ashman) with his daughter, who turns two in April. “I'm praying she likes them. I'm pretty sure she will,” he said. “I mean, listen, you don't have to give me a reason to rewatch anything that I love, but now it's an even more elevated reason, to share it with somebody.”

With a second child on the way with his wife Mia, Criss also shared his thoughts on fatherhood more generally. Child-rearing, he explained, is kind of like creating a storytelling franchise: “Look, if you're a fan of storytelling—which, most of us that love Broadway are—the inevitable, most natural, logical sequel is having kids. Right? Because you now get to experience the same characters and themes with a brand-new character that isn't familiar with the prequel. In that person’s movie, it’s the first one.”

[valsnonsense]

Prince Fern Faye

"Alright everyone! And five, six, seven, eight-!"

Parents: Princess Viva Faye and Clay Heath

Siblings: Conifer (Younger Brother), Basil (Younger Sister)

Age: 23

Pronouns: He/Him

Sexuality: Gay

Genre: Synth-Pop/Funk/Electronic/Disco

Voice Claim: Adam Young (Owl City)

The eldest son of Princess Viva and Clay. Upbeat, easy-going, and a bit of a party animal, Fern is a sassy dancer often found hanging out at cafes people watching and gossiping.

Fern works as a dance instructor for young trolls, teaching them the joys of all forms of dance. Ever since he found and watched old tapes of his dad busting moves in Brozone, Fern has dreamed of dancing as well as his father. When he started dancing, Clay and Viva gave him a headband and some leg warmers for work-out purposes, and he turned it into a whole style.

When not teaching classes, Fern loves to hang out with his friends and cousins, gossiping over coffee or hitting local bars in the evening. Fern has always been a bit of a social butterfly, and feels the need to socialize often. Fern does suffer from a bit of existential dread, so he doesn't like being alone.

If he is alone, Fern loves reading. As a child, he would always carry a book of some kind around. He loves buying books from different kingdoms and seeing the difference in fiction. He even got a tattoo of his favorite book series logo after it utterly wrecked him emotionally.

Music wise, Fern is a sort of free spirit. He enjoys upbeat music that he can dance along to, or more abstract music that makes one think. He unironically loves Disco and will fight anyone who gives him shit for it.

Fern currently resides in Trollstopia, and lives in large apartment towards the center of the city.

Fun Facts!

- Fern has a FUCK TON of hair. Like it's almost unmanageable kind of amounts. If not pulled back, his hair will explode out in all directions. Not matter how much product he uses, nothing can tame it.

- Fern was the first of his cousins to move out of his family's home, as he grew up in the Mini Golf course. There were a lot of tears.

- Fern traveled around for a bit after he first moved out, learning different dance styles from different cultures, as he wanted to include all kinds of Trolls in his dance classes.

- Yes, Fern can golf. He was raised in a giant mini golf course, that shit was hotwired I to his DNA.

And that's the first of my Cliva kids, Fern!! I made him an 80s nut cuz I thought it was funny lol.

Fern went through some minor design changes but BIG persona changes. At first he was more of a snotty book worm, but I wasn't really feeling it. So I still made him a bookworm, now he's just a gossipy bookworm lol.

Also since Viva is a princess, Fern and his siblings are "technically" royalty in the Pop Kingdom, tho they don't really use the titles much.

Also I decided I will be giving Trolls surnames for this AU. Viva (And Poppy's) last name is Faye, and Clay along with Brozone's last name is Heath.

Cookie for u if u know the logo of that book series nxbxjxbndd

Voice Example: Shooting Star (Owl City)

[cto10121]

Twilight Clown Takes—Part 7

Featuring Twilight being both queer and homophobic, more deranged Rosalie fan dumb, and a random simping for Sarah J. Maas. On nom nom away

Twilight Is Homophobic AND Queer!!1!!

Or…and I’m just throwing it out there…Twilight is a romance and the romance genre are notoriously heterosexual???? To the point where one of its nastier tropes is the predatory gay villain (looking at you, Outlander)????

Hell, even now the number of homosexual characters in romances are low, mostly just limited to supporting characters. I suppose it’s improved in recent years, but even in fantasy romance you get, like, Mor from ACOTAR.

At least Clown OP has the self-awareness to know they are indeed writing fanfic.

But regarding the “Edward/Bella would never last and they would get divorced!!” clownery…what canonical basis is there even???? They could barely last six months apart without having a complete nervous breakdown. Yes, they are blinded by their own insecurities and delusions, but they eventually communicate and resolve their issues fairly easily. Their love proves greater and helps them overcome these.

You would think Kristen Stewart would have an easier time playing Bella if she were so obviously bi-coded. Instead we got the most awkward and ill-fitting performance of a major character in years, to the point where her version of the character is among the most hated film characters—ever. Part of it is definitely the stupid script and questionable direction, but there is also a matter of casting type. Bella is a modernized romance heroine while Stewart is a grounded indie actress who at BEST can play a major fantasy heroine—a more emotionally intelligent version of Katniss. Perhaps an animated TV show will be beneficial in that respect, in actually casting for the character.

Rosalie Fan Dumb

Bella: *wants to be a vampire*

Rosalie: How dare you, an autonomous individual different from me, make a completely different choice than what I would make!!!1!! 😡

Clown OP: Complexity 😍

Seriously, we have got to have a long talk about this fandom’s idealization of Rosalie resenting Bella her own autonomy and pissing on her own choices. Edward literally has the exact same position as Rosalie (except that homeboy doesn’t hate Bella for it and understands why) but he is criticized so much more harshly. What the hell is going on?

Also, Bella was gung-ho on becoming a vampire anyway, so this pregnancy did not change her plans in the slightest. Hell, it was her plan to get changed right after birthing Renesmee, so it was all on her terms. Let’s not pretend she was at any point coerced into vampirism! For all this whinging about Bella’s agency, it’s the anti fandom itself that refuses to acknowledge it.

Except that in Midnight Sun we do see Rosalie’s hostility from Edward’s POV and boy, is it super petty and irrational—she cannot even stand to be in the same room as Bella! It’s completely juvenile, which is well, par de course for vampires frozen in their adolescent state.

But again we have the victim blaming. Bella’s existence doesn’t endanger the Cullens; it’s the Cullens’ existence that endangers Bella, as Edward correctly notes and angsts about. The only way Bella endangers the Cullens is that she knows their secret—but of course, she would never tell, so it’s moot point. It’s not even on the table after the car accident scene.

Sarah J. Maas? You mean the author with prose like unseasoned rice? You mean the author with 80% of the most boring ass worldbuilding and 20% actual erotic sex scenes, her actual strength? You mean the author who literally turned her first love interest evil and stripped him of all his personality in the sequel just so that her female MC could end up with the fan favorite antagonist (who drugged her and made her dance suggestively in front of people)? That Sarah J. Maas? A better writer than Meyer? Really????

[misskattylashes]

The Dichotomy of Being a Teenage Alex Turner Fan

In this article I look at why I think so many teenage fans direct so much hate towards Miles.

Look at this image search I did on Alex’s name. First person whose name comes up ‘Miles Kane’, first other person he is in another picture with, Miles...before a puff piece about Louise or Taylor. It’s Miles. There are more results with Miles than anyone else. Whether people like it or not, Miles and Alex are intrinsically linked.

In the words of the big man himself ‘stop and wait a sec’...... imagine Miles was Mila, a constant female companion of Alex’s who he had been close to for nearly twenty years. Had been at his side more than any other woman, had done two duets with him and whilst touring the second one, their performances were so sexually charged you thought any moment soon they were actually going to have sex on stage. What would you think? You would think they were or had been in a romantic relationship. And even though you haven’t seen much of them together over the past few years, Mila constantly talks lovingly about Alex in her interviews, and Alex invites Mila to be the support act for the final days of a very long world tour, and on one of the dates he lets Mila stand side-stage (something his official girlfriend doesn’t get to do) and throughout the set he sings to Mila and can’t stop glancing at her. People would be enamoured with their love story and desperate for them to be together.

So why is it different just because Miles is a guy?

Of course there is the obvious. If Alex is gay, then the teenage fans stand no chance with him, which would be upsetting. But even me, as a creaky old Gen X-er, had gay pop stars who were attractive and sexy – Holly Johnson and Paul Rutherford from Frankie Goes to Hollywood, Andy Bell from Erasure, even Boy George got screamed at, but we accepted they were gay and we didn’t stand a chance and that was it.

Of course, there was no social media then, but did we write hateful letters to them or their partners, or put up posters on street corners saying how disgusting they were? (the 80s equivalent to posting all over Twitter) No.

So why the anger towards Miles?

Unfortunately when I was growing up, homophobia was acceptable. Gay people were constantly the butt of jokes, straight comedians would pretend to be effette just for laughs. At school we even had the reprehensible Section 28, imposed by Thatcher’s government where any mention of homosexuality was banned, even books featuring gay characters, to apparently help prevent us from experimenting and catching AIDS (yes I grew up in the Dark Ages)

But there comes the rub. Because homophobia was acceptable, any negative feelings we had towards our gay pop stars or their partners wasn’t something we felt bad about so we felt no need to pick on anyone as a way of dealing with our own conflicted emotions

Fast forward to 2023. Gay people have rights, can marry, have children, are positively represented in the media, we have Pride, which is on the point of becoming too commercialised, and to be homophobic is to most young people not cool or acceptable.

Those same girls who spew hate towards Miles probably paint rainbows on their pencil cases during Pride, have male gay friends at school and would have a go at anyone who doesn’t support trans rights.

But then there is the fact that the celebrity they desire has a constant male companion, who he has been more publicly intimate with then any of the girlfriends he has had. Scratch beneath the surface and you can spot the differences in them when they fell out after EYCTE -both a shell of their former self. When there was a brief break in Lockdown in the UK, who did Alex choose to meet? Miles. Whether the fangirls consciously or subconsciously think there is something going on, it makes them feel uncomfortable with themselves. The presence of Miles Kane makes them realise they’re not necessarily that right-on girl who is into gay rights, because when they actually think about it, and think about what men do, they don’t like it.

But instead of realising that this is just part of being a grown up – we all have things about ourselves we don’t like, they direct their anger and frustration at Miles, as if he didn’t exist then they wouldn’t be confronted by these unpleasant feelings they have.

So, what I am trying to say is whilst I find the comments about Miles disgusting and cruel, just remember with these girls the person they really hate is themselves, while Miles lives his lovely life with his career and his friends and Alex and Maxie.

I think we know who is the winner here.

[thesinglesjukebox]

CHAPPELL ROAN - "GOOD LUCK, BABE!"

Good Song, Babe!

[7.76]

Alfred Soto: Hey, y'all, Spotify played "Good Luck, Babe!" after ILLIT's "Magnetic" -- are the streaming gods Jukebox-friendly? Maybe a synth line patterned after Wham!'s "Last Christmas" and a vocal that commands attention despite singing a line like "sexually explicit kinda love affair." Then again, that's how people talk. [8]

Jeffrey Brister: What if the narrator of “I Kissed A Girl” was a fucking liar whose inability to admit her attraction and healthily process and metabolize her emotions made her so transparently readable her spurned girlfriend shot a bullet made of yearning, resentment, and justifiably venomous smugness directly between her eyes? [9]

Taylor Alatorre: I have a soft spot for music that performs a kind of empowerment driven by romantic spite, while at the same time being precision-engineered to make the singer look small-minded and weak to the sober bystander; this is why I can never forswear Drive-Thru Records or pre-2016 Drake. In that vein, "Good Luck, Babe!" can be heard as a more ideologically palatable version of "Hotline Bling," right down to the self-degrading tinniness of the initial backing synths. Both songs construct a character whose presumptuous sense of entitlement becomes more apparent with time, and both ask us to sympathize with that character, not in spite of that entitlement, but because of it. Because relatability, and because we're hard-wired to believe almost any convenient lie if it's made to sound pretty enough. Chappell Roan's relative vocal restraint here represents her attempt to come off as the reliable narrator, to prevent too many of her unnervingly real feelings from spilling over. It's an effort that comes undone as soon as she gets to the bridge, when she drops the blasé affect, claims the power of omniscience, and uses it to peer into her rival suitor's future bedroom. "You're nothing more than his wife" -- sure, whatever you need to tell yourself. What, too cynical, you say? Whichever reading the listener goes with, they're choosing cynicism, either the listener's toward Chappell or Chappell's toward the other girl, who at the end of the day may just be a garden-variety bisexual; we're not allowed to know. Love is still a battlefield in the 2020s, queer love not excepted, and "Good Luck, Babe!" isn't afraid to show off the sometimes gory aftermath of those battles, caked in just enough gloss to give us the option of seeing something different in it. A potent cocktail of unraveling passions and high-grade copium, it arrives just in time to be used in AMVs of the final season of Sound! Euphonium, otherwise known as the official anime of yuri-baiting. Good luck, Kumiko! [8]

Will Adams: A breakup song directed at a queer person who was clearly uncertain, self-conscious and anxious about their identity leading them to push a great thing away? Oof. I'm the problem, it's me! But any discomfort I have with seeing myself in "Good Luck, Babe" is assuaged by its giant hooks, a bridge that mounts the tension (sadly, a rarity for pop at this point), and Dan Nigro's production, which draws from the same pillow-soft '80s synthpop of "So Hot You're Hurting My Feelings." It's the sugar to help the medicine go down. [8]

Leah Isobel: I'm convinced that Taylor caused a lesbian pop revolution. Not on purpose, obviously, but perhaps inevitably; of course her simultaneous insistence on both the femininity and the import of her perspective would inspire a generation of gay girls young enough to look for validation from pop culture and old enough to perform deep reads on the line "she's cheer captain and I'm on the bleachers." Some of those artists have even made minor commercial breakthroughs, though nothing has heralded the arrival of a real-deal pop star the way that "Good Luck, Babe!" has. On a musical level, I don't know if I see it. It's catchy, sure, but its chorus isn't quite as singalongable as "Red Wine Supernova," and it doesn't sell Chappell as a persona the way "Pink Pony Club" does. Its production and vocal delivery are so arch that all I can see are the references: a little Wham! synth here, a little Marina & The Diamonds-circa-The Family Jewels whoop there, a "Bags" melodic bite for good measure. (Sidebar: I'm compiling this for an eventual piece about how Immunity is the most influential pop album of the last decade no one steal this from me thank you!) But maybe that's it. A pop star is voracious, ambitious, all-consuming; she cannibalizes. What "Good Luck, Babe!" offers isn't mushy sincerity, but steely-eyed purpose. I don't love it, but I do respect it. [7]

Hannah Jocelyn: I've written so much about about the power of "Good Luck, Babe" but I don't think it's perfect. Among my nitpicks; the "sexually explicit kinda love affair" line doesn't land, the ending nearly kills the momentum, and I've always heard some weird aliasing artifacts on the hi-hats, even in the 24/48 flac download (which might be the nerdiest thing I've ever written on TSJ). But there’s a reason I've been obsessed with this song, and it's not just because I've wound up The Other Woman in emotional affairs with queer/questioning women before. I wasn't as on board with Roan at first, then this song made me go back and get acquainted with the Femininomenon. Unlike most of Midwest Princess, this is not OMG I'm a girl??? and I like GIRLS??? music, and unlike several similar songs about loving women in denial, it's not self-pitying. This feels more real, with palpably complex emotions underneath the showy vocals, and it feels messy in a way that queer pop stars were once supposed to avoid. I could go on and on, and I have, but I'll say this: I genuinely think this song will change lives and cause people to reconsider their identities. At least one of my friends has already mentioned crying to this song. I recently spoke with a music writer that claimed music wasn't necessary, but for the right person, some songs are. [9]

Alex Clifton: I don’t know what I can say about this song that Hannah didn’t already say in her excellent Billboard article, but I’ll try. Up until now Chappell Roan has been my good-time music, with tracks like “Pink Pony Club” and “Red Wine Supernova” regularly stuck in my head.  She’s a girl from small-town Missouri in full drag regalia aiming to give everyone a great time, and she constantly delivers on that front. “Good Luck, Babe!” sounds happy but is one of the more lyrically devastating songs I’ve heard this year, and Roan’s performance is incredible. The way she screams “I TOLD YOU SO” at the end of the bridge rips at something in my heart. It’s angry as all hell but also has a level of concern; Roan doesn’t want the subject to end up in a dead-end relationship and just wishes she’d get her shit together. It’s a delicate line to thread but goes to show that Chappell Roan isn’t just a novelty pop writer. It’s exhilarating watching someone’s star rise, and to watch this song specifically become the catalyst for additional recognition is unlike anything I’ve seen before.  [10]

Ian Mathers: I was hugely impressed with "Casual," even more so with Roan's first record overall, but I'm lightly gobsmacked here with how quickly she's put out something else that simultaneously feels like it could have been on The Rise and Fall of a Midwest Princess, like it sums up what that album was doing (and how well it does it), and like she's already moved past her work there. And it's her most successful single so far? It very much feels like things are going to keep going up from here. [10]

Jackie Powell: When “Good Luck, Babe!” came out last month, it wasn’t what I was expecting on my first listen. I got a tease from friends about what this song was about, but I was underwhelmed by the fact that I couldn’t clearly understand the story that Chappell Roan worked very hard on constructing. Her vocal style on other tracks like “Red Wine Supernova” or “Casual” is much more based in her chest voice and as a result is much easier to lyrically comprehend while listening. On “Good Luck, Babe!” Roan slurs a lot. She opts to implement much more mixing in her head voice during the hook which matches the sonic feel of the synths and drum machine that producer Dan Nigro has added in. The hook flutters and it flutters in a tone that’s paradoxical to the story she’s trying to tell. This is a song about rage, is it not? This is a song about compulsory heterosexuality, a phenomenon that is incredibly frustrating as it is prevalent in 2024. We don’t hear that rage until the absolutely mind blowing bridge where Roan’s upper register soars when she tells her past lover that she told her so. This story that Roan tells is one that so many queer people often face. It’s that same level of discomfort that Ben Platt and Renee Rapp have both sung about in their respective songs “Andrew” and “Pretty Girls.” This track’s importance can’t be understated. Its rise in popular culture can’t be undervalued. But I do wish that the story was illustrated more blatantly. Slurring aside, where is the music video for this? The video for “Casual” was exactly what a Roan fan would expect: a cross between the films Splash and Jennifer’s Body with a dash of heartbreak. I’m reminded of the queer women artists like Hayley Kiyoko and Zolita who have both gained a following for the honest queer stories they’ve portrayed in their music videos, which have garnered meaningful amounts of views. Meanwhile, DJ Louie XIVI recently had a Pop Pantheon episode that pondered if the music video is indeed dead. I would hate for that to be the case for Roan, an artist that thrives on theatrics, visuals and play— the fuel that her exponential and unexpected rise to stardom requires. [7]

Isabel Cole: I feel like it was probably deliberate to set the big bursting kiss-off chorus up in the flutiest part of her range where she can't really enunciate, but I still find it annoying to listen to. The bridge is pretty good, though. [5]

Mark Sinker: Gorgeous control of voice over bare control of desire; fragments of the crunchily expressed across the oldest (cliched, she says it herself) story, oh i'm the “other girl”!!¡¡ and then the closing device (which you can call brechtian if you’re fancy, or lazy) undermines it a little, at least musicially.  [6]

Joshua Lu: The bitter, lesbian reimagining of Gwen Stefani's "Cool" I never knew I needed. [8]

Wayne Weizhen Zhang: I am all for Chappell Roan's meteoric rise to fame as the next local drag supporting queer, but this song feels as basic camp as the fonts used in the visuals for her Coachella performance.  [6]

Nortey Dowuona: If anyone is wondering why this is the Chappell Roan hit, it's because it sounds like a synthpop song from 1986, and pop fans are still somehow locked into 1983-1988 as the best time to listen to pop music. That said, "you're standing face to face with 'I TOLD YOU SO'" is a FANTASTIC LYRIC. [9]

Katherine St. Asaph: The belted "I TOLD YOU SO" is unexpected and amazing. The part that flips the hook from "I'm Gonna Be (500 Miles)" into a soprano trill is great -- between "Super Graphic Ultra Modern Girl" ("Footloose") and "Red Wine Supernova" ("What's Up") she's now three for three on rewriting the Great Karaoke Songbook for 2024. The line "you have to stop the world just to stop the feeling" is so perfect it feels like it must have been written in stone centuries ago and just now unearthed. But if I'm being completely honest with myself, everything else in the track is pretty mid, and repeated listens just make the mid parts seem proportionally larger. [5]

Andrew Karpan: An exuberant jubilant kiss-off for fans of Roan’s last version of this (“My Kink Is Karma”) but more pointed, less funny and charged with a contemplative melancholy bellied under its titanic build. The radical space of queer longing turns into an ocean that lifts all boats. “With your head in your hands, you're nothing more than his wife.” We are lifted and listening.  [8]

Rachel Saywitz: I worry sometimes that I’m not wanting enough. Or I want, but the wrong things. Or I don’t want the right things enough. Chappell Roan is want, maximized and poptimized, and “Good Luck, Babe” is its earnestly sweet manifestation. Roan masters pop’s narrative drama as she coaxes her past, closeted self to breathy, sapphic jubilation with the wave of a bouncing synth wand and a Florence Welch operatic belt. Love is want, at its core, and I feel it cascading through me with each listen, urging my spirit to coalesce with my mind, for once. I want, I want, I want. [9]

[Read, comment and vote on The Singles Jukebox]

[spilledmilkfkdies]

hello, i wonder if the wizards were to swap their powers around so they all got one of their brother’s powers, who would be most vs least suited for each power??

Hi yes hello anon, I work for @solariaswitch, or rather she's my investor and owns like 80% of me. But!! I'll gladly take the ask off her hands, hope that's okay <3

I was gonna type this separated by power, but I noticed that it didn't give me the chance to talk about every wizard as much as I wanted because I'm a little stupid, so I'm doing it per wizard instead.

『 OGRON 』

I can't start this off without putting the deranged take out there that, considering his own main power, he might've handled/used the other wizards' powers before. It's not impossible. Would probably put him at an advantage if a power swap situation were to occur. That being said? I think he'd like Anagan's least in a combat setting specifically, but not by a lot. Could definitely still work with it if necessary, I just don't see Ogron as someone who enjoys running for a LONG period of time, let's just say that.

Now, would he like Duman's or Gantlos' better? I'm gonna say Gantlos'. Do I have a solid reason beyond 'the enhanced senses might throw him off a little'? Yeah, actually. Ogron's way of using it could perhaps take it to a different level than Gantlos, not necessarily better or worse, just different. Uses it on a smaller scale rather than go full natural disaster, doing less damage overall, but being more focused and precise. Safe option. I think he can do it.

『 GANTLOS 』

Do NOT give this poor man Anagan's super speed either. I keep imagining his legs moving before the rest of him is ready, just violently yoinking him along, pulling him in a direction with the smallest step. I'd like to think his movements have weight to them, if that makes sense? So giving him powers that are all about swiftness and literally speed just doesn't sound like a good idea. Would probably be scary though.

I'm on the fence whether he'd handle shapeshifting okay. On one hand I think the enhanced senses would negatively impact him the least, but I don't see him enjoying the actual transforming part of the whole thing, which is pretty important. BUT would he like it more than Ogron's? I don't know either. I mean, the converting damage into strength part could work out for him, I guess? Both powers are quite versatile in the sense that they're both about adapting and doing so quickly, and I already said quick is simply not for him. Okay unhinged take, give him shapeshifting. Ask me to elaborate and I'll disappear mysteriously.

『 ANAGAN 』

Okay so, I'm gonna come out and say he would dislike Gantlos' powers for the same reason Gantlos would dislike his, sort of. It's not his tempo and he's very light on his feet, tries to stomp and might break his leg. Not ideal. I'm gonna come out a second time to add shapeshifting to his 'no' list as well. He likes his powers a bit more uhhh normal. Let's put it like that.

Give him Ogron's powers. PUT HIM IN CHARGE. The audacity of me to go "he likes his powers normal" and then give him this wow. Anyway, I think that out of everyone, he'd handle them best. Quick thinker, a straightforward plan enthusiast, what more could you need? The major downside of it is of course that his own powers don't allow for as much different use as Ogron's do, but that'd be a good thing. I believe in him. He's level-headed enough for it to not get to him, if that makes sense?

『 DUMAN 』

I think he'd be upset with any power that's not his, honestly, also like a majority of the powers, if not all, would genuinely drive him insane and I'm not sure if I mean that affectionately. Gantlos' seismic bs and super strength? Suddenly develops some very serious anger issues. Or enhances the ones he already has, depending on how you view him. Goes clap clap and stomp stomp for funsies, throws cars, experiences the most unhinged tantrum known to man and makes people explode. Probably wouldn't do too well with Ogron's powers either, the general population, I mean. COMPLETELY loses the plot. Being able to pretty much copy any power simply cannot be good for him. Not to dunk on my boy and say he has power hungry hysteria potential. But. Yes I will say that.

Least offending option? Anagan's speed. Final answer. Since he's already pretty physical in his combat style, y'know? It'd be a bigger challenge for him to dress in a way that allows for mobility than it is to figure out how to work with super speed. Might turn into a speedy meat grinder, but just put a leash on him or something, easiest power to keep him in check with probably. Hopefully.

To summarize:

Give Ogron Gantlos' powers, Gantlos gets Duman's, Anagan gets Ogron's and Duman gets Anagan's. That is best case scenario, least problems for everyone. Worst case scenario though? There's some overlap so unless multiple people can get Anagan's, there isn't really a worst. His powers are not popular, poor guy. No actually, the WORST scenario is the one where Duman gets all.

Crazy how the original Trix ask was mine?? Go figure lmao.

[castlebyersafterdark]

He gets bullied and made fun of for being a weird nerd - I don't think he's getting bullied for being gay.

This really interests me... lots of people think troy's bullying in s1 was also directed at mike, and that becomes part of mike's queercoding. i can see this in a dramatic irony sense, where the audience makes a subconscious connection, but i don't think this was troy's intention. i think he truly was just bullying will for being gay but because will wasnt there he picked on his friends. ofc troy picked on all of them, but it seems like he had his own reasons for each of the boys (frog face etc, established very early in the show) and that will's would have been 'fairy' or 'queer' if he'd been there and not missing.

then cos he was gone, troy found more juice in targeting will and seeing how it riled up his friends cos it was the hot topic of the moment. it also adds to mike's queer invisibility reading. i think i'd be happy with a s5 reveal (the miwi scenes?) of mike being a target of homophobic bullying, but until we see that, i think him being an invisible queer works better for his overall arc. maybe some fans are just trying to find as much evidence as possible for gay mike but quality over quantity, ya know?

Yeah, that's entirely it. All a part of Mike and Will having similar but diverging journies. The difference being visible vs. invisible is so key to that difference. The bullying thing certainly throws people. Because yeah, that was a Will target, specifically. Especially because it's really tied into how the townspeople probably assumed something happened to the kid when he was missing. Hate crime or killed by someone like him. Or taken his own life due to a related reason. Small town rumor and ugliness. It's all so sad when you really think about the implications of things with the supernatural elements removed ☹️

But yeah, its more accurate to assume Troy had his individual reasons for bullying them all, but of course there's gonna be spillover. He's rude and crude, it's not like he's all that refined. And the bigoted bullying of course still happens today but the 80s? A lovely little special flair. Look at how men spoke to each other in any media you watch. So, Troy's probably calling everyone in the Party a fag at some point. The difference being it was/is such a catch all. They're getting called it because they're all nerds and losers to the cruder school population. Will's getting called it because they genuinely think he's queer and that's a terrible thing to be, right? Absolutely contributes to Mike wanting and needing desperately to hide and suppress that part of himself, too.

And imagine the pain in Will everytime his friends hear that stuff said to him. "Don't worry, man. Don't listen to them. We know it's not true." And the knife of the words twists deeper. It's true it's true.

I very much imagine bullying and being targeted is going to be a huge theme in season 5. Maybe even this is where the tides turn and the walls break down further for Mike. Now it's guilty by association. They didn't think it before for him. But something terrible happened and look, that freak Byers kid is back. Maybe Mike will be invisible no longer. We'll have to see. But sadly and realistically for the trajectory of the show - those boys have a big storm coming. 😕