#something about how art is inherently political

[midnight-drip]

i look into your eyes, and i

think back to a friend of mine

you're as old as he was

when we left for war

[vampacidic]

LIKE. hear me out. blah blah th e point is that they realize this form of government doesn’t work but here. here. listen to me

student council makes a clear out group: oddballs bad, regular people good. they then blame everything bad on the out-group—bad things are happening in society because this outgroup is attempting to mingle with the rest of us, the normal people, the good people. it’s a selfish desire these bad people have to try and bring us down.

then. what they do. is they romanticize a past that may or may not exist—they say society (yumenosaki) used to be good. it used to bring normal people good things, like jobs and money (and you even see in-text that there used to be more jobs for the average man)

(now you can make a point here how chiaki recognizes it is not the oddballs’ fault for this, but instead how the academy at large has fallen due to a bad reputation, thus meaning he is no longer ‘average’, but that is not my point here. my point is that the ordinary man is struggling to survive), but when the oddballs showed up, things went to shit. and it’s their fault

enstars also makes a…conscious note that this will not solve the problems of the ordinary man. hell, it makes their problems worse, exemplified in ra*bits’ first live, because society still revolves around an upper class—the upper class is now just the student council, not the oddballs.

there are other tidbits, too—eichi mentions in element that he controls the media that gets in and out of yumenosaki, which is a standout feature of fascism (need your people to be loyal to you or else things fucking die)

and on that note of loyalty, keito being so worried about the cultists also makes sense, because fascism also uses religion as a tool, usually via exterminating it; can’t have people loyal to you, the government, first and foremost, if they’re loyal to god!

and my very favorite part. comes from element movie

it’s just….the words tsumugi uses at this point.because he very easily could’ve used ‘strategy’ or something similar in this scene. and the same point would’ve gotten across. the fast-paced nature of the strategy leaves eichi dying. but no—he picks ‘blitzkrieg’. which you cannot divorce from its origin—it’s the strategy used by nazi germany in ww2, featuring the fast, heavy, offensive strategy. so that makes me ask: why? why use blitzkrieg? why use a word with a strong, nasty history behind it when other words could easily fill that role instead?

my answer is that it’s an intentional comparison akira wants the audience to make. he wants us to draw an ugly, nasty comparison between the student council, between such a concentrated government, and a government that demanded complete submission. he wants us to recognize how easy it is to just blame others for our lives, how nasty and ugly humans can be when it gets us what we want. he is trying to show us that this type of ideology will not work and we can apply it to real life politics, beyond that of an idol game.

sorry going insane. okay. okay you guys have to hear me out on this. have you heard of a political ideology called fascism,

[badolmen]

I feel that there’s a world of difference between “fandomizing real world politics and tragedies” (in my understanding - applying ‘fandom’ to, well, real world politics and tragedies eg. shipping war criminals or writing rpf for victims of traumatic events) and “making fandom art which acknowledges real world politics and tragedies” (in my understanding - political cartoons/art with a particular flag/etc.).

I’m not saying that the latter can’t be insensitive or in poor taste depending on execution but also…idk it’s weird to see tumblr activists freaking the fuck out over art of dunmesh senshi bringing food to Gaza. I can’t believe that’s the hill you want to kill (your own allies nonetheless!) on. We have people writing smut for about specific IOF soldiers or shipping Palestinian journalists, like, is the comic imagining a fictional character showing up to help people in a horrific situation really what you want to call tone deaf and insensitive?

[theamazingannie]

Saw someone on Twitter complaining that tv shows and books and such made during modern times often don’t depict anything having to do with the pandemic and how it’s some big conspiracy about pandemic denial and I can understand why someone would think that considering all the denial irl but personally I don’t want to depict Covid in my work because the pandemic completely affected so many aspects of our lives and by depicting it in my work I’d have to completely change so many parts of my stories because there’s no way the events would go as planned if there was a pandemic happening and I’ve been writing these stories for YEARS, since before the pandemic, and I don’t want to change anything and even if the work was new, how do you incorporate this huge life event into your story without it taking away all the focus?

[oflgtfol]

i hate the english

[thedreadvampy]

I mean sure, I can understand this perspective, but I'm not sure whether most people feel less shaken to be thrust into conversations about "self-unaliving" than conversations about "suicide"

and I for one as a survivor would much rather unexpectedly encounter somebody talking about "rape" than somebody talking about how funny it is to have sex with somebody when they don't want to, a normal thing that doesn't need to be named because it's So Normal.

which is to say. this is a post about words. the words are not the distressing thing about the discussion. the distressing thing is the distressing thing about the discussion. sugarcoating, dodging or renaming the distressing thing doesn't make it less distressing but it DOES often make it harder to have a frank discussion about it or address it in serious terms.

[pinch of salt: solid probability from their blog that this person is a Literal 14 Year Old and the perspective from 30 and 14 are very different. I do stand by all the points I'm making but I think this conversation lands a lot different for people at different life stages - there is something to be said for the general issue that the internet has flattened social groups to the degree that I as a 30 year old can make a post to my audience of largely adult millennials that immediately enters the same conversational space as people half my age and still in school. that seems. ungreat. as the primary way we engage in conversation. but I don't have solutions to offer.]

you gotta be able to say "die"

you gotta be able to say "suicide"

you gotta be able to talk about "sex"

they're uncomfortable topics, YEAH for SURE

because LIFE is uncomfortable. Death and suicide and sex and pain are straight up going to happen. not having words for the way it discomforts you doesn't make it more comfortable, it just makes you less able to reach out about it.

even more vital, you gotta be able to say words like "rape", "abuse", "queer" or "racist". cause we fought fucking hard to name those experiences. to identify "rape" as distinct from "sex" and "racism" as distinct from "acceptable behaviour" and "queer" as distinct from "invert"

like the function of communication is not to minimise immediate discomfort. we gotta be able to talk about stuff that's hard or sucks or causes difficult conversations.

[ot3]

The Flower That Bloomed Nowhere

What is it, and why you should read it.

(Art by purple)

The Flower That Bloomed Nowhere is a currently updating webserial by author Lurina. It's one of my favorite things I've read in a long while and I'd like to convince you all to give it a chance.

My elevator pitch is this: A time-loop murder mystery directly inspired by Umineko, with a lot of similar vibes to the Locked Tomb Trilogy - partially due to it's meditations on grief and mortality and partially due to it's far-future magical sci-fi world where we follow a fucked up lesbian necromancer on a task she is determined to see through to the end. A deeply complex, unique, and believable world that plays hosts to one of the best interpersonal dynamics I've read.

In a future so far-flung that it is past the heat death of the universe, humanity has constructed a new society that is post-scarcity but not post-stratification. Utsushikome of Fusai is one amongst a class of prodigious young medical arcanists (essentially grad students) who are invited to visit a recently legitimized conclave of top-of-the-line researchers studying immortality. Accompanying Su is her best friend Ran, a fellow arcanist. Over the course of the novel we begin to slowly unravel exactly what ulterior motives have brought them to this conclave and how events in their childhoods and years of working toward their shared goal has warped their relationship into what we now see. This relationship is the crown jewel of Flower's narrative, and getting to peel back the layers of it as you read is a delight.

Like Umineko, Flower is a murder mystery that prevents itself with in-universe Rules that dictate the murders' parameters, meaning there's a lot to chew on for anyone who likes solving mysteries. For those that don't, like myself, Flower offers instead a richly developed world and plenty of open questions about the sociopolitical and metaphysical implications of its own worldbuilding.

Below the cut, I'll go into more detail about the series (without spoilers!) for those of you whose interest has been piqued.

The Flower That Bloomed Nowhere is currently ongoing, updating every few weeks. It's several hundred thousand words, so if you're looking for something substantial to keep you entertained, you've got it. As you might expect from the length, the pacing is decently slow. I don't see this as a bad thing at all, because within this pacing Lurina dripfeeds the readers enough new and interesting information at a regular rate that it never feels like your time is being wasted. But if you can't handle slow burns, I wouldn't recommend this one for you.

If you enjoyed the Zero Escape series and liked that they stopped solving murder puzzles to infodump about fringe science, I think you'll get a lot out of Flower. Characters are frequently interrupting their life-or-death scenarios to have lofty, philosophical and political discussions. It's a ton of fun if you like reading characters argue.

'People have to sleep.' 'People have to work.' 'People have to die.' But those were just vague rules, phrasing I'd used because it had been easier in the context of that conversation. What really mattered, on the day-to-day level, was the idea that it was all for something. If someone invented a elixir that made people not to need to sleep, it would, in retrospect, recontextualize all nights everyone ever wasted sleeping as wastes of time. Not something that occurred for some inherent purpose, but whims of circumstance, a tragedy of when you happened to be born. If you accepted that all unfair things in the world could be removed, if only someone knew how - fatigue, labor, death - then to exist in the world we had now, with all its grotesque imperfections, was to know that you had been violated by fate.

Along those lines it's just got a sense of humor I really enjoy. Pretty dry and cavalier. It manages to keep the mood light without feeling like it's undermining it's own stakes. I'm particularly fond of Su's penchant for telling incredibly depressing suicide jokes that just Do Not Land.

The peer pressure cut into me like a hot knife. I hesitated a little, biting my lip. "Well, uh, okay. I'll just tell a quick one." I swallowed, my mind quickly scrambling. "Okay, so, there's a woman who runs a dispensary for second hand goods. She sees a man come in who's a regular customer. He's kind of a mess-- Has a big beard, a bad complexion. He buys a razor, and tells her he needs it to clean himself up, because he has a date." I could see that I now had Ophelia's attention and that Kam was looking pleased with herself, but Ran was watching me, too. I could see the look in her eyes. It screamed at me, with such vividity that it could be sold at an art gallery: You better not be telling a suicide joke right now, or we're going to have a talk. But it was too late. The wheels were already in motion.

As I mentioned up top, the relationship between Ran and Su is just one of my favorite interpersonal dynamics ever. Period. The author is playing some insanely complicated 5th dimensional yuri chess and I am absolutely here for it as someone who likes characters who are deeply devoted to each other in a way that is deeply deeply fraught. I cant emphasize enough how obsessed I am with what they have going on.

Additionally, as stated, the worldbuilding in Flower is top tier. The author clearly understands how every part of her world functions, which makes the moral quandaries and politics presented all the more impactful because they're very believable. It's hard to talk about Flower's world without spoiling too much of the specifics that get slowly revealed, but it doesn't fall back on any typical sci-fi standard fare and feels like a breath of fresh air amongst recycled and repetitive worldbuilding tropes.

A lot of really fun side characters. Strong voices for all of the supporting cast (♥♥Kamrusepa♥♥) and even though not every character gets their own arc, they all clearly have plenty of interiority. Once again, another thing that makes Flower feel very believable despite it's absurdities.

Autism

"Did you notice anything out of the ordinary with anyone?" She eyed him. "Anyone who seemed tense?" "Saoite, I'm not sure if you've noticed, but half of our class is so autistic that they constantly seem tense. You might as well ask me to find a specific turd in a sewer." "Just answer the question, please," she replied flatly.

Guys it's really good just trust me I don't want to spoil you for the more intricate plot beats but they're doing some crazy shit here. It's never a bad time to support an independent author's project. If you're sick of corporate mass-media and stuff needing to be marketable, getting into independent works owned and supported by individual creators is a great way to push back against that. I highly recommend it.

[weecherylita]

Thoughts on the Neil Gaiman Allegations

I followed Neil Gaiman on tumblr not because I'm a massive fan of his work (I've read two of his books, and one of those he co-wrote with someone else) but because it was interesting to get behind-the-scenes info about Good Omens.

Because he seemed, for the most part, to be a pretty affable and interesting person.

Because it was nice to see someone so prominent be willing to assert the rights and dignity of lgbt people, and most especially trans people in this era where they are being consistently vilified and used as a political punching bag in my own country and elsewhere.

Because his writing advice was decent, and he seemed to value and support artistic endeavour in all its forms.

Because the stories from readers talking about what his work had meant to them were a consistent reminder of the power of art to connect us all and transform our lives.

Because he consistently advocated kindness.

(I know some people have been saying he couldn't handle criticism and he bad-mouthed other public figures, but I think I must have missed those incidents - my impression was that he was very often complimenting and defending people).

It was a horrible shock to learn that (yet again) a creator I respected fell so far short of embodying the values he spoke up for. When things like that happen it can make you question human decency itself, especially when it just seems to keep happening again and again; public figures who seem so progressive turn out to be abusers. Is human goodness just a story we tell ourselves? Is genuine progress even possible, when those who speak up for it prove themselves to be so incapable of living by those ideals?

I don't know how much of Gaiman's public persona was genuine and how much was just a front for some consciously manipulative and predatory behaviour. To be honest, I'm not sure I care if we ever find out how much of what we saw was real. He's lost our respect - most likely forever, and he shouldn't be put in a position where he can abuse people's trust again.

I'm sorry for the people he hurt, and I hope they get time to heal.

And I think those values that I saw in him are all still true, even if he is false.

Kindness and decency is still something to live by, even and especially in times of darkness.

Art still has the power to move, connect and transform us, whether you want to keep reading Gaiman's works or not (and if you're finding it tough because you've lost that enjoyment and connection to stories that meant a lot to you, know that there WILL be other works out there that can make you feel it again).

Creative endeavour IS still inherently valuable.

Transgender lives and identities still matter. Transgender people are still deserving of dignity and respect. There may be plenty of transphobic people out there who feel emboldened by this, and I'm not gonna pretend to understand exactly how scary and horrible that must feel. All I can say is that there are other people out there who still believe in you, and still want to support you.

Human decency is not a lie. I guess we need to be wary of public figures who come across as too good to be true and remember that everyone has capacity for both good and bad, but not everyone fails as badly as him. Not everyone succumbs to their worst instincts. Not everyone is an abuser. Human goodness is still alive, and something to strive toward and take comfort in.

[regheart]

i'm thinking about how the characterisation of the black family tends to be really difficult to get right and one of the reasons that i can think of is that we don't know enough of wizarding culture, so we try to convey the atmosphere and the dynamics through codes that are familiar to us

that's why they are so victorian in so many fics. they act and speak like they're inside a victorian novel, they only ever wear black and dark green, the high society/pure blood circle is also composed by meeting for tea, and having balls, and discussing politics, and arranged marriages

and that's not bad!!! i read and love some fics like that, but i think this is an aesthetic that completely ignores some of the things we know about wizards and about the blacks

first of all, the clothes. wizards wear robes. not late 19th century clothes, robes. and they're most often dramatic and colorful. this is something easily observed in the very first chapter of PS. so i think the blacks should wear deep purple and emerald green and silver and burgundy and turquoise, make outfits fun!!!

second, grimmauld place tells us some things about its inhabitants. the fact that it's a muggle house in a muggle neighborhood shows that they must have some level of cognitive dissonance in terms of what elements of muggle culture and lifestyle they hold (but i don't think that applies to holding the same patterns of views and behaviors of high society, again, it's about how the writers tries to convey "rich and uptight" with codes that are familiar to them). the decoration choices for the house are also very telling, family heirlooms, big clocks, tapestry... troll leg and house elf heads??? that's morbid. that's camp.

and my point is, black family characterisation lacks on campiness. wizards are inherently weird. anything in which they're overly polite and too aristocratic is inaccurate. they are bigots and lobbyists and one of them was literally headmaster of hogwarts. they are into the dark arts but they don't torture their children. make them funnier and messier and weirder and more like real people instead of a bunch of lines from downton abbey glued together

[handweavers]

Cab you elaborate a little on that post about artists of color not having a good understanding of materialism? Like, do you mean that they are unknowingly perpetuating capitalism by being materialistic or something else?????

( This is a genuine question because I misunderstand long posts easily, sorry if it sounds rude ).

when i say 'materialism' i'm referring to dialectical materialism, the marxist theory that political and historical events result from the conflict of social forces - people's access to material needs like shelter, food, healthcare, etc. and their relationship to the means of production. these events can be interpreted as a series of contradictions and their solutions. it is the scientific method for understanding politics/economics and history, and the basis of marxist analysis and of marxism leninism as a framework.

i'm saying that many artists of colour in the west speak a lot about capitalism, imperialism, colonialism, war, etc. from a vaguely 'leftist' but ultimately still liberal perspective, and thus they are not actually challenging anything with their work. they will talk about anything But class, and fall easily for bourgeois politics as long as it's concealed in social justice or "leftist" or antiracist sounding language

and it's because they won't engage directly with marxism leninism, they won't engage with learning materialist analysis, and having this understanding would prevent them from falling for these attempts and allow them to do work that actually has some kind of meaningful impact on these systems they claim to be against. so they are trying to talk and write and make art and organize about capitalism and colonialism without understanding how these things actually function in a literal, material sense...

simply existing as nonwhite people in the west doesn't inherently teach us these things, otherwise all people of colour in the west would be communists. we have to actually do the reading and be open to another framework of understanding the world, to having our worldviews shifted. but i think some people don't want to do that because of their relative class position. it makes them uncomfortable, or they don't want to admit that they benefit from imperialism in some ways. they can't - or won't - decouple an awareness of their class position from morality or their personal feelings.

without a marxist framework for understanding what capitalism is and how it functions, whatever work they claim to be trying to do to challenge capitalism or colonialism or whatever At Best doesn't do anything, and At Worst continues to serve bourgeois interests. the confusion between colonialism and imperialism in particular is easily exploited, so that with the language of anti racism and decolonization people end up agreeing with and promoting US/NATO foreign policy on imperialized nations - these buzzwords can sound pretty good if you don't know better. all this talk about decolonizing our minds and art practices and being anti capitalists but no one can actually explain what capitalism is or how colonialism works or the material role of racism under capitalism, nor do they want to talk about their own relationship to capital, so the talk is just empty lol. all these artists trying to figure out "alternative, embodied ways of thinking and being" and it's all just more liberalism

[reachartwork]

I'd love to know how you can advance AI art ethically. I'll be perfectly honest and say I'm of the opinion that there's no way to make AI art ethical but I genuinely would like to hear your thoughts on this since it's something you clearly have put a lot of thought in to. Not trying to hate just curious about your opinion.

i reject the premise that it is inherently unethical to perform any of the operations required to do image synthesis. almost every single assumption required to start from the baseline of "it's unethical" (it's plagiarism, it requires no creativity, it smashes two images together, etc.) are all just straight up incorrect.

unless you can explain to me how to fit two (or more) billion images into 2 gigabytes (i'll let you do the math) in a way that preserves their features for later "stealing" (you can't) then i am rejecting the premise. because even if it were some sort of database that smashed pieces of images together (it's not), if your argument is that it's unethical to do that then you have a whole lot of collage and blackout artists that you need to contend with too. (if you think collage is also unethical then you are internally consistent, good for you, and then we just have a garden variety disagreement). generally speaking there is no argument one can take that can meaningfully separate ai art from other forms of transformative artwork except via special pleading, which doesn't convince me.

so yeah, basically, you (the general case you, not You Specifically, Fish Of The Woods) have to do the work to convince me that it's unethical because i am not starting from the premise of "it's inherently evil, except my one exception", i am starting from "it is neutral and you have to convince me that it's bad". and so far nobody who is anti-ai has managed to do so, primarily because (this is not a dig at you) nobody who is anti-ai actually bothers to understand how it works, and thus all their criticisms don't sync up with actual reality. while i'm sympathetic to labor arguments i.e ai art will put people out of jobs (definitely much more salient than the other ones), that is regular old capitalism abusing automation, and not an inherent flaw in the technology itself that renders it Ontologically Evil From Birth.

i get like five of these asks a day so i politely request you send future inquiries to the AWAY Discord, which is full of people who have significantly more patience than i do.

[kharsagii]

This weekend I sifted through hundreds of screenshots for the OJ fandom bullying report. Made a ton of progress on it, and I hope to release it soon, so that everyone can see the evidence I discuss here! 🫂❤️

One thing I noticed was that a common theme of how fandom bullies justify their hate/cyberbullying is claiming the Throzzy ship, the way I and other contemporary artists draw it (or inherently), is “unhealthy.”

This is fucked up for 2 reasons:

1- This ship isn’t canon. Thus EVERYTHING about the ship is determined by the artists. No 2 artists are the same, thus no 2 depictions of the ship are the same. There is no common “throzzy” ship- everyone has a unique take on it. Without even bothering to read/investigate the source material of each artist’s unique depiction of the ship, the bullies just flat out lie about the content, and project onto the entire ship ideas they got from creators from 10+ years ago that aren’t even active. You’ll see so many of them have “Throzzy DNI” in their bios as if we’re some kind of cohesive political party or some shit LMFAO.

2- Telling women and queers what’s “healthy” for them is wrong and controlling. So many of us are fighting against misogyny/queerphobia in our irl relationships that’s been normalized as “healthy.” Nobody else can tell you what’s healthy- only YOU can decide that.

How I depict Throzzy is literally what I WANT in a relationship- loving your partner for the ways they’re different, healing eachother from trauma, and having loads of nasty kinky sex.

NOBODY can know what’s healthy for you in a relationship more than you do. We’re adults, we decide it for ourselves. And it is ESPECIALLY ridiculous when it’s a fictional ship of two microbes LMFAO.

There is NO one right way to love someone- and anyone that claims YOUR ship is unhealthy needs to stop telling other adults what they should desire and how they should live their lives. Doing so is simply the newest way men/misogynists exert heteronormative forms of control over women and queers.

Queer minorities who enjoy kinks exist. Consensual and healthy age gap relationships between adults exist. Kink shaming + hating on diverse REAL relationships we project onto fictional ones, just because they don’t fit your narrow minded view of what YOU want, is frankly bullshit + sexist.

Women and queers don’t need you to tell us what WE want is wrong. We’ve taken that bullshit from men all our lives. We decide for OURSELVES.

You have a problem with it? That’s fine. Just shut the fuck up and focus on your own relationship, or lack thereof, instead of calling us groomers/pedos/racists/whatever label suits your fancy (or falsified screenshots) because you’re mad that we’re fucking confident, happy, and FLOURISHING doing something you don’t like.

And to my fellow Throzzy artists, NSFW artists, or frankly any artist from any ship that antis get a hardon from targeting- KEEP DOING YOUR THING! This fandom belongs to YOU just as much as anyone else. Your artwork belongs to YOU. Your blog, page, profile is YOURS and no one else’s.

Making art is the greatest form of self love- and no one else can tell you how to love yourself. KEEP MAKING ART!!! ❤️❤️❤️

[undasura]

i made a thread about how all art is political AND meaningful inherently, and someone replied with a picture they drew of an among us with a huge dick and balls to be like "well is this political" and i think they were like. very clearly joking. but its really interesting that... yes actually, the amongus with a huge cock you just replied to me with is not only serving a purpose by making me laugh really hard because you gave him detailed trimmed pubes, but also, when i said a very intense matter-of-fact statement about art as a whole, it inspired some sort of "i have something to say about this" in you. which, is, inherently political. even if its among us huge cock on a note pad

[txttletale]

Sorry if you posted about this before and I've missed it but are you arguing with anti-AI Art people (Specifically the ones deliberately ignoring or misrepresenting material facts) just on the basis that they're wrong? Or are you doing it to try to show that AI is going to be used anyway and they need to change the way they argue about it if they actually want to be productive with their goal of not having AI be harmful?

I suppose in truth I already seem to believe you're doing both at once, which is fine, but I guess what I'm really getting at is trying to prompt you for more of your own interpretation of the AI art discourse as a whole and how you feel about people calling you "Pro-AI" despise the fact that your economic beliefs inherently make you (from my very biased perspective) "more" "Anti-AI" than they are!

Sorry for the messy ask lol, you're just getting at a lot of thoughts I've been having trouble putting to words and want to see more!

yea i would absolutely describe my critiques of 'anti-AI' as coming from three separate but related places because there are three separate types of 'anti-AI art' talking points:

talking point type 1 is all the 'not real art / soullless / no effort' bullshit. i'm mostly critiquing these because they are fundamentally reactionary and profoundly silly and because i like talking about art and what art is and how it's made and shit.

type 2 is, to borrow a phrase from marx, "the economic shit". it's here that i think my critiques are more 'positive' than 'negative', as in, i think that these talking points are mostly coming from a reasonable place but are tactically misaimed -- my critiques here mostly amount to 'stop whining about midjourney and start unionizing your workplace because one of those will make a difference when AI comes for your job and the other won't"

type 3 is IP/copyright-brained petty-bourgeois mindset, arguments centering on ridiculously expansive concepts of 'theft' or 'plagiarism' and 'ownership'. they are superficially similar to type 2 arguments but instead of the fundamentally sympathetic and reasonable "i am worried i am going to be fired by my boss / no longer taken on by clients because of this new technology" they are instead arguing that they are either owed the hypothetical lost profits or royalties for every generated image. this is the type of argument i'm most vehemently against, because i think that all of these arguments essentially end in campaigning to strengthen copyright and IP law, something which i'm profoundly and fundamentally against.

sometimes people will make type 1 arguments when they fundamentally have type 2 concerns, but that just makes their type 2 concerns seem weaker and less worth taking seriously by association, which isn't good for us organized labour fans out there. but yeah these are all separate talking points -- i think i try to approach The Economic Shit with the 'you need to change how you think to achieve something productive' mindset, because of the three positions that's the one i have a fundamental political commonality and nominal shared goals with.

[transmutationisms]

Hi Caden don’t know if you listen to Ethel Cain but was wondering what u think abt her subverting the Americana aesthetic since I think she’s often compared to Lana, at least online. I do think she’s doing something different & to me more compelling than Lana, but I don’t really know how to articulate it.

yep i like ethel cain. i agree she and lana are doing very different things. like, i said before that lana uses american nationalism because she's playing off the fact that it makes/has an erotic appeal, and she places herself as the object of desire in that paradigm—tell me i'm your national anthem, etc. my read on ethel is that she's interested in the rural americana 'trad' aesthetic from a very different angle, where she's trying to connect the homestead and american rural social structures to the perpetuation of violence. there's some overlap here in the sense that lana is definitely also interested in sexual violence and sexuality-as-violence, but in her work the violent or abusive man is generally a specific figure who's aberrant from the norm, and a lot of the artistic interest for lana comes (i think) from her interrogating what it is about this man that's appealing to her and how she sees herself through his eyes. with ethel, on the other hand, she portrays violence as coming through the infrastructure of normal and normative social structures, like the family and the church, with abuse understood to be a feature of these and not a bug. family, church, etc are in turn understood to be part of the infrastructure of american rural communities, casting the critique she's making through the ethel character onto this entire social apparatus (& there is some implication here of how this is all a part of westward colonial settlement—which is a potentially fruitful direction to go in, the idea of expansion into the 'frontier' as a narrative of, or narrative prerequisite to, violence).

so for example this is partly why, for ethel, incest specifically is a mode of sexuality & violence that she continually uses and interrogates: she's invoking it as an intensification of the 'normal functioning' of the family, which means the whole family structure gets pretty ruthlessly questioned through the character of ethel and the violence she faces. she invokes the trad aesthetic and the idyllic family homestead, then shows you the brutality that creates and is created by them. for lana, the family is not a concern in this way and is not something she's questioning or challenging the way ethel does (the daddy/girl thing in lana's work is p far removed from even a pseudo-incestuous reading most of the time, even in her lolita references). there's a similar distinction with how ethel examines protestant theology and practice with the explicit goal of pointing out inherently violent aspects of it, whereas for lana, invoking god or christian imagery is generally more on the level of playing off the way that american nationalism resembles and uses rituals of religious worship. lana takes political phenomena like the appeal of nationalism, and expresses them through the erotic configuration of these relationships with older, dominant men. with ethel it's more that she looks at social structures and practices signified by the rural americana aesthetic, and pokes and prods at these structures until the violence inherent to them is glaringly obvious to listeners through the ethel character's story. it's a way of problematising these institutions and practices, not letting them hide in plain sight by presenting themselves as benevolent.

so yeah i can understand why people might want to compare these two artists, but i think they're actually doing very different things. i would probably not say either of them 'subverts' americana or signifiers of nationalism, which is not a criticism, i just think that concept is often poorly defined and less frequently applicable to art than people sometimes think lol. ethel uses her character's story to deconstruct and question the american aesthetics and institutions her work invokes; lana translates these aesthetics and institutions into explicitly erotic discourses and dissects them through the allegorical figures of the people and relationships in her songs. (this is not to discount the importance of erotics in ethel's work as well obvi but this post is already long :P)

[dr-spectre]

Helloooo, just saw the big ol Callie rant and thought I’d share my (albeit not as detailed) thoughts cause the first Splatoon game I played was Splatoon 2 and I took my sweet time on the story mode.

Despite her being your main companion throughout the story mode, I found Marie’s spiteful and clearly discriminatory language towards the Octarians to be consistent overkill, while she was obviously mad about Callie “going missing”, these fellas were only doing their jobs and it was painfully clear that Marie had an inherent dislike for their entire species. Since I hadn’t seen Craig Cuttlefish before I didn’t know that this discrimination came from him, with a distinct parallel between their jabs (aggression being directed and focussed at the Octarian species at a whole rather than the reason you’re here in the first place) and with the fact that I was the one barging in and committing wanton destruction and violence in their territory the universal hate felt incredibly undeserved.

As for Callie, no Squid Sisters songs feel so authentic and genuine as the ones made in Octo Canyon. Even Bomb Rush Blush isn’t trying to sound perfect for any pop lover’s fragile little ears, it’s erratic and fills every silence like a one sided argument. With each song sounding like a vent album and the art showing Callie to be miserable and having to desperately hide it on the surface, she’s seemingly using her distance from Inklings as an opportunity to be completely outwardly honest and express the deeper emotions that wouldn’t be accepted in the media she’s surrounded by. Rather than “I REMEMBER!!!” being some ooga booga the cool glasses magic has been dispelled, I saw it more as Callie accepting these emotions she’d kept from expressing and realising her lifestyle and family meant enough to her that it would be more worth it to try and work through those feelings with them rather than use an outlet that worries them. Additionally, she has quite the opposite view on Octarians to Marie, finding them consistently cute and clearly still being friends with Octavio as they collaborated during the Low Water Party after the events of Octo Expansion (discreet lore but it shows she truly had an enjoyable time there!)

Now I could ramble about DJ Octavio for hours so I will cut this short, while - as you mentioned - Octavio was helping Callie escape the stress of her lifestyle in the interest of his own species, (uh oh the can of worms is threatening to open) insert the fact that Octavio winning means species equality through political negotiations put off for hundreds of years. I know! Oh goodness gracious how terrifying! The spicy beats man has used drastic measures due to neglect and forced poverty of a substantially sized society through giving stressed squid sanctuary! Next he might use his technological advancements in energy efficiency to revolutionise our industrial infrastructure- SHIELD YOUR EYES, CHILDREN!!

oh hey! cheers for reading the full thing!

Oh... oh damn... you just plopped your own rant in here, jesus.

I respect it honestly, i respect the hustle.

You know what's kinda crazy? From my knowledge and what people say online, Marie's hatred for Octarians as a species is a NoA localisation thing and not something in the original Japanese version of Splatoon 2. I could be wrong on that but that's just something I've heard in the grapevine.

Yet another example of poor localisation due to deadlines and rushed development cycles!!! ISNT IT SO FUN HOW IT KEEPS OCCURRING AND HOW PEOPLE BELIEVE IT INCLUDING LOUD VOICES IN THE COMMUNITY AND WIKIS TAKING THE NOA VERSIONS AS THE HOLY GRAIL?!?!?! SO FUN!!!!

(Massive fucking sarcasm.)

I dont have much else to say in response to your ask but, I wanna touch on DJ Octavio for a bit because I think the way that Nintendo treats him as well as the fanbase treats him kinda fucking sucks and flips flops between different personalities and actions he's done.

I swear to god people have such different takes on his personality and what he's done over the three games and it's a real headache to deal with. And the way that a lot of people talk about what he did in Splatoon 2 and the suggestions people say.... ugh... they make him so unredeemable and disgusting.

In Splatoon 1, depending on if you play the NoA version or European/Japanese version, he's either very silly and in your face, making musical puns and being a loud mouth. Or he's trying to be intimating and he gets to the point in his dialogue instead of making musical puns.

The worst things he did in that game was kidnap Cuttlefish and tie him up as bait to fight Agent 3, and stealing the power source for the Inklings. Cuttlefish is a frail old man and Octavio has anger towards him, so it makes sense he would go after him and snatch him up.

And then in Splatoon 2, people wanna fucking say that Octavio kidnapped Callie and brainwashed her, removing all of her memories and making her into a slave for the Octarian army... LIKE... WHAT?!?!?! OCTAVIO IN SPLATOON 1 WASNT THAT EVIL!!! WHY DO PEOPLE SUDDENLY SAY HE DID SOMETHING INCREDIBLY UNREDEEMABLE LIKE THAT?!?! WHY DOES NINTENDO PUSH THAT SHIT TOO?!?! ITS SO ANNOYING!!!!

AND PEOPLE BRING UP THIS PIECE OF CONCEPT ART TOO AND GUYS!!! ITS JUST FUCKING CONCEPT ART!!! ITS NOT CANON!! THERES NO EVIDENCE TO PROVE THAT THIS HAPPENED IN THE REMATCH FIGHTS!!! YOU BRAIN DEAD SONS OF-

You can't just go from "im gonna use Cuttlefish as bait because I hate that guy!" To "neheheh, when Callie isn't looking... I'm gonna grab her and brainwash her!" And then to "IM GONNA GET THAT OLD BASTARD AGAIN! HE TOOK MY ARMY!!!" You can't flip flop between silly old guy wanting vengeance against his lover to enemy Cuttlefish, to a malicious beast that kidnaps young women dude. You can't just do that.

You see the issue here? People give Octavio this ultra dark stain on his legacy and I think it ultimately ruins his redemption in Splatoon 3. He did something unredeemable and you cannot go back from that.

It makes more logical sense for Octavio to use his abilities of propaganda and manipulation out of desperation to convince Callie to join him. Octavio is a general and does things out of rage and vengeance from the past. He is not malicious in his actions and a lot of them can be justifiable. It makes more sense for Octavio to go "I need Callie because my peeps are dying, I'll convince her to join me and then I'll hypnotise her so she's more comfortable in the Octo Canyon to help my troops!"

Octavio is still obviously in the wrong for hypnotising Callie, duh. But, like I've said a trillion times, hypnosis isn't mind control, you cannot force someone to do something against their knowledge and morals. So it's more justifiable for Octavio to hypnotise Callie than to literally kidnap her and brainwash her while she was kicking and screaming, trying to stop him. Okay? WE GOOD SPLATOON COMMUNITY?!?!?!

Ugh.